OF  A  PAMPHLET,  ISSUED  FROM  THE 


PRESS  OF  THE  WESTERN  CAROLINIAN, 


ZAf  SALISBURY,  JWC> 


Written  by  David  Henkel,  arrogating  to  himself,  in  said  pamphlet,  the  title  of 
Bishop,  by  which  he  attacks  the  Lutheran  Synod,  which  has  no  Bishops  $ 
and  by  which  Review,  the  Latin  texts  he  makes  use  of  in  the  title  page 
will  be  found,  by  sensible  readers,  to  apply  to  him  and  his  confederates, 
particularly  the  word  " exlex" 


Misum  teneatis  amid  ?  and,  Parturiunt  montes  et  nascitur  ridiculus  mm? 

Is  evident  throughout  his  whole  pamphlet,  to  men  of  common  understanding ; 
and  which,  in  this  Review,  is  exposed  to  the  inquiring  ignorant  dnly,  whom 
he  too  successfully  leads  with  bombastic  nonsense  and  perversions  of  plain 
truths, 


SALISBURY, 

1821, 


Bishop  Watson,  in  his  Anecdotes,  page  363,  says,  that  wherA 
he  was  about  answering  a  virulent  pamphlet,  written  against 
Tiim  by  orie  Cumberland,  he  found  his  blood  was  now  and  then 
heating,  and  he  laid  the  pen  down — -for,  says  he,  what  is  the 
use  of  cudgeling  a  dwarf  .it  is  a  miserable  occupation.  This 
may  be  applicable  to  me  with  respect  to  D.  Henkel's  pamphlet ; 
and  it  required  a  resolution  to  wade  through  dirt  from  page  to 
page ;  and  for  his  sake  the  peri  would  not  have  been  used  to 
spoil  paper ;  but  where  so  many  absurdities,  pompous  brag- 
ging, low-bred  billingsgate,  scurrilous  language,  scandalous 
comparisons,  perversions  of  truth,  libelous  charges,  and  mean- 
ness throughout,  are  dished  up  for  the  digestion  of  the  unwary, 
who  are  not  able  to  detect  poison  without  assistance,  I  could 
not  help,  for  their  sake,  disagreeable  as  the  task  is,  to  review 
the  performance,  especially  as  the  name  of  God  was  so  often 
used  in  vain  ;  and  hypocritical  expre  ssions  of  love  to  the  mem- 
bers of  the  church,  is  stated  as  the  only  object  he  had  in  view. 
For  their  sake,  then,  it  could  not  be  avoided,  otherwise  it  would 
have  been  left  for  venal  purposes.  If  nothing  would  be  said 
to  it,  he  would  strut  about,  and  say  to  the  ignorant,  "  They 
dare  not  and  cannot  say  any  thing  against  it."  I  have, 
however,  tried  to  remain  in  the  bounds  of  decorum  ;  but 
should  the  reader  now  and  then  find  a  home-thrust,  and  almost 
■unavoidable  satirical  hints,  whereby  smiles  are  occasioned,  and 
horror  when  reading  the  appendix,  they  will  have  the  goodness 
not  to  ascribe  it  to  our  ministry,  but  to  facts  and  me  alone, 
who  am  principally  aimed  at,  and  who  have  flesh  and  blood, 
feut  Who  desire  to  be  serious  in  defence  of  truth. 

G.  SHOBER, 


DAVID  HENKEL. 


It  was  expected  that  the  disturbances  which  you  created  ia 
the  Lutheran  Church  would,  by  degrees,  subside  ;  and  yout 
verbal  exertions  through  the  country  to  irritate  the  members 
of  our  church  against  their  ministers,  were  deservedly  disre- 
garded. Nothing  was  attempted  in  any  manner  to  oppose 
your  inflammatory  conduct,  except  what  appeared  in  our  two 
last  minutes  according  to  truth,  and  which  truth  was  recorded 
as  gently  as  possible.  But  when  you  began  to  print,  read  and 
publish  perversions  of  facts,  some  attempts  were  lately  made 
by  me  to  open  the  eyes  of  the  people.  And  now  you  come* 
out  with  a  pamphlet,  in  which  you  unsuccessfully  appear  in  the 
garb  of  an  angel  of  light,  (for  malice  is  evident  in  almost  every 
page  ;)  and  your  object  is,  in  the  first  place,  if  possible,  to  pre- 
vent a  union  of  our  church ;  secondly,  to  make  your  readers 
believe  that  you  are  immaculate,  and  was  treated  with  injus- 
tice by  our  synod  ;  thirdly,  that  we  preach  wrong  doctrine ; 
and  lastly  and  principally,  your  object  must  be  to  widen  thet 
breach  now  existing  between  us,  your  father  and  brother,  so  as 
to  prevent  a  re-union,  in  order  that  you  may  direct  the  whirl- 
pool of  a  mudpuddle,  for  you  have  called  your  father  and 
brother  dumkoepfe.  Do  not  think  that  for  your  sake  I  re- 
luctantly address  you,  for  seven  years'  experience  proves  you 
to  be  incorrigible.  No;  what  is  done  here  is  only  done  for 
such  readers  as  have  a  desire  to  judge  impartially.  These 
will  expect  nothing  but  plain  language ;  such  I  will  endeavox 
to  give  to  them,  and  treat  according  to  your  deserts. 

It  is,  therefore,  in  the  first  place,  necessary  to  request  you 
to  reverse  your  Latin  motto,  and  apply  it  to  yourself.  Are 
not  you  ashamed,  counting  yourself  among  those  that  know 
the  Lord,  and  yet  not  afraid  of  his  judgment,  for  uttering  and 
printing  such  a  bombastic  Oration,  in  which  you  expose  a  clo- 
ven foot  thus  plain  ?  You  say,  page  1,  u  The  tongueless  woes 
of  bleeding  churches"^  rouse  you  to  opposition.    I  do  not  un- 

*  I  found  the  following  in  the  Ladies'  Literary  Cabinet  of  March  10, 1821, 
£ee  whether  it  is  not  applicable  to  you. 

Sublime  beyond  sublimest  sublimation  ! 
In  thoughts  no  fellow,  and  in  words  no  peer,: 
Sing  on,  great  man  !  Thou  art  thyself  Creation  $ 
Thy  truth  exclaims,  "  The  tongueless  woes  are  here.'*5 
Proceed,  great  man !  and  let  creation  know  it, 
That  twisted  nonsense  is  the  true  sublime. 
Scorn  those  who  think  thou'It  only  reach  fame's  portal, 
say  thy  cranium  is  a  little  craf<$ 


derstand  such  bombast.  That  woes  and  offences  are  existing 
is  evident ;  but  wo  t©  him  by  whom  they  come !  And  is  it 
not  you?  Did  not  the  Lutheran  ministry  exist  in  perfect 
harmony  before  you  (then  a  young  stripling  not  twenty-one 
years  old)  was  curiously  introduced  thereto  I  Yea,  ever  since 
that  time  woes  began.  But  as  soon  as  people  know  you,  they 
wilt  pass  away.  You  give  to  yourself  great  airs  :  But  as  you 
call  yourself  a  Bishop,  (which  title  the  Lutheran  Church  in 
America  never  used,  as  under  that  title,  as  now  understood, 
distractive  prerogatives  were  always  assumed  in  Christianity,) 
and  as  such  you  assume  to  teach  your  seniors,  and  the  major- 
ity of  them,  how  to  act.  You  know  that  your  audacious  as- 
sertions against  them,  will  be  disdained  to  be  read  by  them, 
much  less  officially  answered.  But  you  did  not  write  for  thern^ 
you  wrote  for  the  multitude,  in  order  to  irritate  them  against 
their  ministers ;  seeking  by  all  means,  like  a  roaring  lion, 
whom  you  may  devour.  You  attack  them  with  language  by 
the  common  readers  unintelligible.  When  they  hear  you  in 
the  pulpit  calling  your  seniors  V4  Antichrist describing  the 
colors  of  the  rainbow,  and  what  they  signify  :  see  you  riding 
the  beast  of  the  revelation  for  hours,  and  explaining  the  mean- 
ing of  the  horns,  as  if  you  held  them  in  your  hands ;  inviting 
youngsters,  whether  they  can  read  or  not,  to  a  three  days'  cat- 
echisation,  and  fit  them  in  that  time  to  partake  of  the  Lord's 
supper;  proclaiming  to  them  their  certainty  of  salvation,  if 
they  only  partake  thereof:  They  are  astonished— -t hey  never 
heard  such  sermons  from  their  preachers,  who,  as  in  duty 
bound,  confined  themselves  to  simple  doctrinals  and  scripture, 
as  necessary  to  salvation.  And  poor  things,  they  will  too  soon 
find  out  your  drift.  When  with  your  doctrine  they  arrive  at 
the  confines  of  hell,  they  will  then  say,  he  wanted  our  dollars, 
&c.  and  deceived  us.  You  sliiy  creep  into  other  ministers' 
congregations,  in  order,  if  possible,  to  blacken  their  reputation 
and  doctrine.  That  you  have  not  much  success,  shews  that 
the  majority  have  sense ;  and  they  will  decide,  not  as  you 
dictate,  but  according  to  the  unsophisticated  Word  of  God. 

Do  you  know  Korah,  Dathari  and  Abiram  ?  I  see  you  do, 
by  your  conclusion,  p.  65.  You  better  take  care.  It  is  use- 
less to  give  you  one  single  r6ply  to  the  opposition  you  make 
against  the  church,  or  the  plan  for  a  general  union  of  the 
church  in  America,  for  that  plan  has  ripened  into  a  constitu- 
tion. It  is,  however,  evident,  that  printing  of  books  is  your 
principal  objection  against  a  union,  which  your  family  expects 
to  lose.  And  according  to  page  46  of  your  Libel,  you  was 
afraid  that  when  a  general  synod  should  expel  a  rotten  mem- 
ber, there  would  be  no  chance  left  to  deceive  the  people.  You 


call  the  Liturgy  a  ceremony — Catechism  also.  You  know 
your  father's  books  have  been  in  use  for  many  years,  for  want 
*  of  better.  Some  of  his  compositions  are  tolerable ;  some  are 
below  criticism.  His  Christian  Catechism  is  not  Luther's — 
you  know  it.  Was  he  not  writing  a  Liturgy,  to  be  introduced 
among  us,  also,  and  which  was  defeated  by  an  excellent  one 
now  in  general  use,  after  being  first  approved  of  by  two  syn- 
ods in  Pennsylvania?  In  this  point,  your  shoe  pinches.  I 
expect  your  caucus  will  soon  publish  a  volume  of  your  ex  el- 
lent  sermons  on  Antichrist,  the  rainbow,  and  your  sin-forgiv- 
ing poxver,  derived  from  being  equal  to  Christ,  f  know  that 
you  make  people  believe  as  if  I  was  connected  with  the  prin- 
ters in  Baltimore,  and  share  profits  with  them  in  the  excellent 
German  hymn  books  approved  and  introduced  by  the  Lutheran 
and  Reformed  Synods  in  Pennsylvania,  Maryland  and  North- 
Carolina.  I  say  it  is  not  so ;  and  refer  the  readers  to  the  ap- 
pendix. You  wilfully  and  designedly  misrepresent  things  to 
the  people.  It  is  impossible  to  think  that  you,  calling  your- 
self a  Bishop,  should  have  no  more  sense  than  to  compare  a 
general  union  of  the  Lutherans  in  synod  to  the  whore  of  Rome, 
as  you  do,  page  14.  Then  what  are  you  ?  But  according  to 
the  spirit  inhabiting  you,  and  which  shews  malice  in  front,  as 
page  13,  you  cannot  but  rail  at  such  an  institution*  which  will 
admit  none  to  be  members  of  the  ministry  by  self-created  au- 
thority. You  know  that  what  you  call  your  ordination  to  be  a 
Bishop,  was  against  the  precedents  of  all  regular  church  gov- 
ernments ;  and  that,  as  such,  you  cannot  be  admitted.  The 
bishopical  title  will  make  the  Lutheran  pastors  withdraw  from 
you.  "  An  exotic  plant,  germinated  in  hell,  fostered  by  an 
old  harlot  in  the  garden  of  Rome,  poisoning  all  that  is  pure, 
and  metamorphosed  into  a  maniac  demon  in  the  disguise  of 
religion."  These  are  your  own  polite  words,  page  13.  How 
do  you  like  such  language,  if  applied  to  you  ? 

I  have  no  objection  that  the  half  of  your  soul,  which,  page 
16,  you  call  "  understanding,"  should  "  walk  the  planetary  re- 
gions ;"  but  if  the  other  half,  which  you  call  "  will,"  is  not 
~with  the  first  half,  it  will  never  arrive  on  Calvary  and  Golgo- 
tha, from  whence  humble  Christianity  emanates;  but  it  will 
be  tumbling  from  Parnassus  to  Tartarus,  or  be  drowned  in 
Styx — for  higher  than  Parnassus  you  would  not  reach. 

Every  true  christian  must  shudder  at  your  scurrilous  lan- 
guage about  the  desirable  union  in  spirit  of  all  true  lovers  of 
Jesus,  page  17.  You  have  no  shame  in  you,  or  you  would 
have  beheld  the  astonished  and  abhorring  physiognomy  of 
all  the  denominations  of  christians  there  named,  against 


you,'^  while  you  dipped  your  pen  in  such  gall.  You  know 
that  no  such  union  as  you  invent  can  be  effected,  or  is  contem? 
plated :  but  surely,  it  would  be  a  millenium,  and  a  desirable 
one,  if  the  sheep  of  one  flock,  guided  by  and  belonging  to  one 
shepherd,  could,  while  feeding  on  his  pastures,  love  one  an- 
other with  all  their  diversified  colors.  Page  19,  you  say,  that 
u  to  cultivate  the  holy  religion  of  Jesus,  which  is  full  of  truth 
and  mercy,  will  preserve  the  liberty  of  America,  and  (O,  sanc- 
ta  simphcitas!)  produce  new  heroic  Washingtons  and  philo- 
sophic Jefferson$"\  Does  this  come  from  a  christian  teacher  ? 
or  does  it  come  from  a  hunter  of  popularity  ?  "  Great  is  the 
Diana  of  the  Ephesians,"  was  shouted  by  the  populace,  when 
Alexander  the  silversmith  had  irritated  them  on  account  of 
the  craft*  But  I  hope  that  our  people  will  see  through  the 
disguise;  and  after  having  read  your  production,  will  see 
your  drift  to  be..., I,  by  itself ;  I,  or  egotism. 

I  pity  you,  that  you  gave  yourself  so  much  trouble,  in  Ger- 
man and  English,  to  write  against  the  plan  for  a  general  union 
of  our  church  in  the  United  States ;  for  that  plan,  as  above 
said,  is  out  of  date  now.  Four  synods  have,  by  their  deputies, 
in  Hagerstown,  adopted  a  constitution ;  and  our  synod,  begun 
at  Trinity  Sunday,  1821,  adopted  that  constitution.  But  you 
do  not  care  about  it :  your  object  is  to  keep  our  church  mem- 
bers in  confusion,  make  the  water  muddy,  and  (alligator-like} 
devour  your  prey  unseen  :  thus  keep  it  muddy,  and  always 
bring  forward  irritable  stuff,  only  to  keep  up  a  ferment  against 
your  seniors.  About  this  time  last  year,  we  were  inundated 
by  German  libels,  without  signature,  addressed  to  our  church 
members  ;  in  which,  with  bitter,  yet  popular  language,  pre- 
tended ministers  from  Ohio  were  made  to  paint  a  contempla- 
ted union  in  dreadful  colors.  These  libels  were,  at  our  last  sy- 
nod, and  in  Pennsylvania,  deservedly  disregarded.  For  if  the 
writers  had  not  had  sedition  in  view,  they  would,  like  honest 
men,  have  signed  their  names  to  the  same.  The  plan  for  a 
general  union  was  adopted  by  the  majority — by  two-thirds  of 
the  synod  then.  N.  B.  Take  notice  of  this. ...see  constitution* 
For  if  there  was  any  sense  in  your  assertions,  that  we  acted 
herein  contrary  to  the  constitution,  you  know  two-thirds  have 
a  right  to  alter  it.  After  the  adoption  of  the  plan,  it  wras  natu- 
rally supposed  that  the  German  pamphlets  would  now  go  to 
their  proper  use,  as  the  poison  therein  contained  could  have 

*  As  Klopstock,  in  his  Messiah,  describes  the  Angels  surrounding"  the  Cross 
of  Christ,  when  Abadonna,  a  fallen  angel,  was  sneaking  into  their  circle  as  an 
Angel  of  Light ;  or  when  he  stood  on  the  last  judgment  day,  demanding  an- 
nihilation, and  all  faces  were  turned  towards  him. 

f  If  Mr.  Jefferson  should  read  this,  he  would  smile  contemptuously,  and 
Hijike  you  a  present  of  Volney's  Ruin  qf  Empiretf 


f  - 

no  further  official  effect ;  but  you  now  revive  it  by  your  (Ora- 
tion, and  recruited  the  venom  by  spreading  it  in  the  German 
language  again.    Here  I  will  relate  the  following  :   N.  B.  The 
postmaster  in  Salem  has  a  right  to  open  all  bundles  coming 
from  other  states  to  North-Carolina.    A  large  bundle  arrived 
from  Virginia,  which,  on  examination,  contained  printed  stuff, 
and  which  was  properly  put  up,  open  at  one  side  ;  but  knowing 
from  what  quarter  the  bundle  came,  I  suspected  that  letters 
might  be  secreted  therein     which,  however,  was  not  the  case* 
There  were,  perhaps,  two  dozen  of  the  above  libels  in  the 
bundle,  signed  by  nobody,  and  addressed  to  nobody  but  to  the 
Lutheran  community  at  large.    They  were  forwarded  to  Lin- 
colnton.    After  the  arrival  there,  I  was  informed  that  on  each 
libel,  on  a  blank  spot  at  the  end,  some  person  had  written 
something;  which,  when  David  saw,  he  was  ready  to  swear 
that  it  was  my  hand  writing — (see  appendix;)  threatened  to 
indict  me,  and  inform  the  P  svmaster-General  thereof  to  dis- 
miss me,f  &c.    He  demanded  the  postage  again  of  the  post- 
master, and  was  raving.    Now  I  wish,  David,  you  would  let 
the  public  know  through  a  credible  channel,  (not  you,)  what 
was  written  on  the  pamphlets.    They  w  ould  then  judge  of  the 
propriety  of  the  words  :  but  until  you  have  that  done,  I  do  not 
know  what  to  say.    If  it  was  written  in  Salem,  I  am  confident 
that  nothing  improper  was  mentioned.    But  by  your  conduct 
in  returning  the  libels  to  the  post-office,  it  appears  that  the  re- 
vived poison  contained  in  a  sheet  which  you  again  intended  to 
administer,  found  such  an  antidote  in  a  few  words  at  the  bot- 
tom, that  you  was  ashamed  to  circulate  them.    This  was  surely 
grievous  to  you ;  and  you,  no  doubt,  have  made  it  out  as  if 
you  had  suffered  a  pecuniary  loss.    It  is  proper,  therefore,  to 
inform  the  readers,  that  I  have  seen  a  copy  of  a  letter  to  Mr* 
Reinhardt,  wherein  He  was  requested  to  return  to  you  the 
postage,  and  buy  the  pamphlets  of  you  at  a  high  price.  No 
doubt  he  has  made  you  the  offer ;  and  if  you  have  not  taken 
up  therewith,  it  was  only  because  you  was  afraid  that  poison 
and  antidote  would  circulate  together,  and  that  the  first  would 
of  course  lose  its  effects.    You  now  read  what  is  printed  to  the 
unwary ;  but  you  don't  act  like  an  honest  man,  and  tell  your 
hearers,  at  the  same  time,  what  is  and  can  be  said  against  it, 
so  that  they  may  remain  in  such  darkness  as  to  believe  that 
whatever  is  printed  is  true  ;  and  you  do  not  tell  them  that,  if 

*  It  would  not  be  worse  than  to  fill  up  an  order  with  246,  instead  of  g36. 
Of  which,  more  hereafter. 

f  I  was  postmaster  before  you  was  born,  and  have  remained  ever  since.  I 
question  whether  your  oath  or  certificate  would  have  influenced  the  P.  M.  G. 
to  believe  that  I  had  embezzled  your  property,  or  your  certifying-  that  before 
you.  was  born  I  was  unworthy  of  confidence.    See  the  Star,  of  May,  1820, 


s 


iich  a  pamphlet  is  published  without  signature,  it  can  only  be  re* 
garded  as  a  seditious  libel,  &c.  Be  it  as  it  will,  I  can  assure  you 
that  my  conviction  is,  that  any  person  who,  with  a  few  words,  can 
prevent  one  soul  from  becoming  a  rebel  to  his  church,  deserves 
applause  ;  and  every  honest  man  will  admit  that. 

The  constitution  of  the  union  of  our  churches.,  which  is  now 
adopted,  eases  me  of  the  burden  of  exposing  the  many  absurdities 
against  a  union,  as  contained  in  your  Oration.  And  what  the  con- 
stitution is,  I  shall  explain  to  the  readers.  To  and  for  them,  I  shall 
review  the  other  part  of  your  libel ;  during  which,  I  shall  put  ques- 
tions to  you.  And  as  you  endeavored  to  irritate  the  congregations, 
Iby  trying  to  convince  them  with  far-fetched  arguments,  that  injus- 
tice was  done  to  you  ;  and  as  you  treated  the  Rev.  Mr.  Storke  with 
detestable  meanness,  me  as  a  designing  man,  and  all  of  us  as  crimi- 
nals, (page  41,)  and  the  whole  synod  as  accessaries  to  injustice,  it 
is  necessary  to  publish  the  papers  which  were  laid  before  us  at 
Buffaloe  Creek  Synod,  in  order  that  the  public  may  decide.  I  trust 
that  the  impartial  members  of  our  church,  and  other  friends,  will 
decide  (if  they  know  as  much  latin  as  you)  in  cafiut  auc'oris  crimen 
plerumque  redundat. 

You  will  take  notice,  however,  that  I  shall  hereafter  disdain  to 
take  notice  of  any  thing  you  may  say  or  do  against  me  personally . 


9 


TO  the  Readers  of  DAVID  HENKEV S  Oration  against  a  general  Tfnioh  of 
the  Lutheran  Churchy  and  his  other  exhibits,  printed  in  Salisbury,  in  the 
year  1821. 

We  desire  to  believe  that  you  are  all  well  meaning  and  hon- 
est men,  and  such  as  are  capable  to  serve  on  juries  :  If  so, you 
will  not  decide  between  us  by  reading  the  statement  made 
against  us  in  bitter  language  by  the  accuser,  before  you  have 
read  what  the  accused  has  to  say.  If  you  cannot  or  will  not 
hear  both  parties,  nothing  can  be  said  to  you*  But  you  ought 
to  be  reminded  of  what  you  have  often  witnessed,  that  when  a 
man  hath  a  bad  cause,  and  must  make  shift  to  use  such  argu- 
ments as  he  himself  does  not  believe,  and  is,  of  course,  laughed 
at,  he  begins  to  rave,  scold,  and  curse,  and  calls  the  other 
party  with  opprobrious  names,  gives  to  his  best  devised  plans 
and  actions  a  criminal  and  horrid  complexion  ;  and  all  this  for 
the  purpose  of  covering  his  own  dirty  designs* 

Now  if  you  read  HenkePs  Oration  calmly,  will  you  not  find 
that  he  makes  out  all  those  ministers  and  synods  who  approve 
of  a  general  union  to  be  incarnate  devils  ;  that  they  intend  to 
destroy  the  christian  church ;  that  the  true  Lutheran  doctrine 
and  discipline  will  be  overthrown  by  them  ?  Does  he  not  ac- 
cuse all  of  them  with  perjury,  and  enforce  this  accusation  with 
puerile  yet  vehement  assertions,  (which  yet  every  sensible 
man,  although,  perhaps,  an  enemy,  will  at  first  view  reject  ?) 
Does  he  not  call  the  majority  of  the  members  of  our  church 
(excepting  in  Lincoln)  dupes  and  apes  ?— Page  30.  Did  you 
ever  read  such  billingsgate  language  in  support  of  truth,  ex- 
cept from  a  Pope  ?  Now  let  me  ask  you,  my  friends,  serious- 
ly, what  did  you  ever  see  in  your  ministers,  against  whom 
such  malice  is  exerted,  that  you  should  deprive  them  of  your 
love  and  confidence,  by  which  you  hitherto  smoothed  their 
rugged  path?  Can  you  believe  such  a  young  being  as  D.  H» 
that  they  are  for  a  general  union  in  order  to  tyrannize  over 
you?  Are  their  children  not  among  you?  Have  they  no 
sense,  and  can  coolly  agree  that  fetters  shall  be  forged  for  them  ? 
Has  any  of  them  any  prospect,  through  a  general  synod,  to  be 
increased  in  worldly  estate  ?  If,  then,  by  only  superficially 
glancing  over  the  above  questions  you  will  decide  in  the  nega- 
ative,  you  may  still  ask,  What  is  a  general  union  for,  and  what 
good  will  it  do  to  the  church,  to  you,  and  to  your  children  ? 

Before  these  questions  are  answered,  by  laying  the  constitu- 
tion, with  observations,  before  you,  you  will  attend  to  the  fol- 
lowing outline  :  The  general  synod  will,  by  its  delegated  au- 
thority, prevent  one  drinking-parson  from  ordaining  another 
bread-seeker  in  that  line,  and  from  being  called  a  Lutheran 
2 


M 

minister,  as  it  was  the  case  forty  years  ago,  to  the  disgrace  of 
our  church,  and  which  now  seems  to  creep  in  again,  although 
in  another  shape.    2d.  We  are  far  behind  other  societies  in 
being  able  to  give  the  necessary  classical  education  to  students 
for  divinity.    We  have  hitherto,  by  the  grace  of  God,  made 
shift  to  keep  our  church  in  credit,  as  to  doctrine  and  disci- 
pline ;  but  if  we  contemplate  our  natural  increase,  the  disper- 
sion of  our  members  to  the  Rocky  Mountains,  north-west, 
west,  and  south  :    3.  If  we  see  that  sects,  holding  and  teach- 
ing soul-destroying  doctrines,  are  daily  arising,  and  philoso- 
phic religion  creeping  in  among  those  who  have  money,  to  be 
taught  and  instructed  in  worldly  wisdom :   4.  If  we  see  other 
societies  laudably  exerting  themselves,  by  a  classical  education, 
to  enable  their  preachers  to  withstand  the  torrent  of  infidelity 
and  superstition  with  power,  eloquence,  and  unction  from 
above  :    5.  If  we  behold  missionaries,  properly  educated  by 
different  societies,  proceeding  among  all  nations  with  the  Bible 
in  their  hands,  and  understanding  the  same  in  the  original,  so  as 
to  enable  them  to  translate  it  into  unknown  languages,  in  order 
to  proclaim  the  Saviour's  love  to  the  human  race — should  we, 
the  oldest  publicly  acknowledged  Protestant  Church,  continue 
to  lay  dozing  waiting  for  chances  of  inspiration  to  fill  up  the 
places  of  departing  ministers ;  or  shall  we  see  others  exerting 
themselves  for  the  cause  of  Christ,  and  supinely  lie  on  our 
oars,  waiting  for  a  breeze  to  move  us  on,  without  even  exert- 
ing ourselves  to  hoist  sail  for  the  breeze  ?    Ought  we  not  to 
have  been  the  first,  in  Luther's  spirit  and  in  Frank's  zeal,  to 
proclaim  the  glad  tidings  to  surrounding  nations  ?  And  are  we 
not  the  last  ?    Has  it  not  the  appearance  as  if  the  candlestick 
is  about  to  be  removed  from  us  ? — -Rev.  2,  5  ;  seeing  that  per- 
nicious, soul-destroying,  superstitious  doctrines  are  creeping 
in  among  us— read  II.  Timothy,  iv.  3,  4.    But  as  we,  single- 
handed,  are  not  able,  and  if  able,  not  willing  to  establish  a 
seminary  for  the  purpose  of  educating  ministers  and  mission- 
aries, (for  it  has  been  tried  without  success,)  is  it  not  a  desira- 
ble thing  for  the  whole  church  to  be  united  in  one  body,  and 
are  we  not,  as  one  united  whole,  able  to  establish  such  a  sem- 
inary, so  that  our  church,  with  its  pure  doctrine,  may  revive 
and  be  supported  by  men  capable  to  refute  pernicious  stuff  ? 

Reader,  you  that  ,  love  the  Saviour  and  his  Zion,  think  of 
these  outlines  respecting  a  desirable  union  ;  and  if  you  must 
then  think  that  our  rich  brethren  in  the  northern  states  will 
effect  the  greatest  part  of  the  expense  of  raising  sound  preach- 
ers for  your  children,  grand  and  great-grand  children,  and 
their  succeeding  race,  say  at  once  we  must  be  united.  If  you 
cannot  say  so?  surely  you  will  say,  (except  you  care  nothing  for 


11 


your  succeeding  race,  and  whether  you  will  meet  them  in  heU 
or  heaven,)  My  fortune  is  demoted  to  my  Saviour  ;  we  are  able 
and  willing  to  establish  a  seminary  here^  raise  ministers  and 
missionaries  herey  support  them  and  their  families  also,  without 
assistance  and  without  a  union  ;  we  can  obtain  endowed,  un- 
fluctuating, humble  and  learned  teachers  by  our  own  means  ; 
but  if  you  say,  pray  do  it.  What  can  you  now  in  conscience 
say  against  such  a  design  for  a  union  ?  Has  any  of  your  pres- 
ent preachers  any  private  interest  in  it  ?  Or  is  their  intention 
not  for  the  good  of  our  present  and  future  existence  as  a 
church  ?    Reflect  coolly. 

We  will  now  examine  in  detail  the  constitution  made  by  the 
General  Synod  last  October.  That  constitution  is  in  the  room 
of  the  plan  against  which  D.  labors  with  virulence  in  his  Ora- 
tion ;  and  because  that  is  executed  by  a  constitution,  ready  for 
the  approbation  of  our  synod,  it  is  useless  to  say  another  word 
about  the  Oration  addressed  to  you.  It  will  not  be  expected 
that  a  full  verbal  translation  is  here  to  be  given,  provided  you 
have  the  substance  or  marrow  of  it.  The  printed  translation 
will  be  among  us  in  due  time.    It  begins  thus : 

Constitution  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Synod  in  the  United 
States  of  North- America. 

Whereas,  Jesus  Christ,  the  great  Head  of  his  Church,  left 
no  particular  prescription  how  church  government  should  be 
regulated,  the  church  enjoys,  in  all  her  departments,  the  lib- 
erty to  make  such  regulations  as,  according  to  circumstances, 
appear  to  be  best :  In  confidence,  therefore,  in  God  our  father, 
in  the  riame  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  the  gui- 
dance of  the  holy  spirit  in  the  word  of  God,  for  the  exercise  of 
brotherly  love,  for  the  furtherance  of  christian  union,  to  pre- 
serve the  spiritual  unity  of  peace,  we,  the  deputies  from  New- 
York,  Pennsylyania,  Maryland,  and  North-Carolina,  have,  for 
ourselves  and  successors,  formed  the  following  constitution. 

N.  B.  This  preamble  only  expresses  that  our  church  has  the 
same  power  left  by  its  head,  to  make  such  general  regulations 
in  America,  as  the  churches  in  Europe,  and  all  societies  in 
America,  have  ;  and  has  nothing  to  do  with  congregation  reg- 
ulations, or  church  discipline,  which  every  congregation  regu- 
lates by  the  Bible. 

Now  friends,  do  you  find  any  thing  herein  against  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  and  against  the  Bible  ?  Is  not  the  general 
creed  of  our  church  concisely  expressed?  Where,  then,  is 
Antichrist? 

Art.  2.  This  establishes  the  number  of  deputies  to  be  sent 
from  each  synod,  such  as  was  in  the  plan,  excepting  that  Pern** 


12 

sylvania  only  sends  six  instead  of  eight,  if  they  have  as  many 
as  eighty-six  preachers  in  their  synod.    Now  you  are  told  that 
the  Pennsylvania  synod  will  govern  the  whole :  this  is  false. 
Are  there  not  three  synods  besides,  who,  if  ever  so  small,  send 
as  many  deputies  as  they,  if  their  ministry  is  ever  so  numer- 
ous ?    And  how  many  legal  synods  will  surely  be  soon  estab- 
lished, so  as  to  secure  an  equality  and  a  majority  against  them, 
in  case  they  should  propose  inadmissible  things.    Or  can  it  be 
supposed  that  they,  or  any  synod,  will  send  villains  to  repre- 
sent them  ? — this  can  only  be  supposed  by  mean,  grovelling 
souls-r-or  that  they  will  saddle  themselves  and  churches  with 
burdens  ?    Each  lay-deputy  has  a  vote,  (and  there  are  to  be  as 
many  as  ministers,)  except  in  one  reserved  case,  where  the 
votes  are  to  be  by  synods.    This  is  true  republicanism.  In 
our  Synod  it  is  not  so ;  but  there  the  deputies  have  no  more 
votes  than  ministers  present ;  we  had,  however,  swerved  from 
that  rule,  in  order  to  give  to  our  deputies  full  power ;  but  du- 
ring our  last  aynod  the  former  rule  was  (for  sinister,  yet  inef- 
fectual purposes)  revived  according  to  the  printed  constitution, 
and  the  deputies  ought  to  insist  for  amendment. 

Art.  3 — Sec,  1.   General  Synod  examines  the  minutes  of 
all  the  synods,  in  order  to  become  acquainted  with  the  situa- 
tion of  the  church.    Is  this  not  proper,  in  order  to  find  out 
where  help  is  necessary  ?  Is  it  despotism  ?    Sec.  2.  With  re- 
spect to  all  proposed  books  to  be  used  in  public  worship,  the 
General  Synod  acts  as  a  united  committee  of  the  other  synods, 
In  the  following  manner :    1.  The  above  committee  examines 
all  works,  books,  catechisms,  liturgies,  hymn-books,  and  con- 
fessions of  faith,  and  imparts  thereon  its  well  considered  opin- 
ion, advice,  or  admonishment*    No  synod,  or  ministry  in  con- 
nexion with  the  General  Synod,  can,  therefore,  publish  for 
general  use  any  new  book  or  writing  before  such  hath  submit- 
ted a  complete  copy  to  the  General  Synod,  and  hath  received 
their  opinion,  admonishment,  or  advice.    Now  what  bugaboe 
is  this?  The  General  Synod  acts  as  a  committee,  of  course  they 
must  report ;  and  to  whom  ?  surely  to  the  synods  individually. 
And  what  are  they  to  report?    Gan  a  committee  command  ? 
No :  it  attempts  no  such  a  thing ;  it  adviseth,  counsels,  and 
admonisheth*    And  when  ?  Answer :  On  application  to  them  ! 
Of  course,  no  synod  or  individual  can  palm  a  book  on  all  the 
churches  before  it  is  revised  by  the  collected  wisdom  of 
the  church.    And  after  all,  if  the  synod  proposing  such  a 
book  for  revision  should  not  approve  of  the  advice  given,  is 
there  any  prohibition  here  to  go  on  with  the  publication.  No  : 
They  may  go  on,  but  it  will  not  be  introduced  in  other  states, 
a*ld  remain  confined  to  its  own  circle.    Sec.  3.  When  the 


\ 


13 


General  Synod  thinks  proper  to  propose  new  books,  &,c.  to  the 
synods  or  ministries,  for  private  or  public  use,  the  synods  or 
ministries  will  truly  reflect  thereon  ;  and  if  any  one  of  them, 
should  not  approve  such  proposition,  it  is  hoped  that  the  cause 
or  causes  of  the  disapprobation  will  be  communicated  to  the 
next  General  Synod,  (perhaps  after  three  years'  time  for  re- 
flection,) that  it  may  be  recorded  among  the  minutes  of  the 
same.  Is  there  any  despotism  here  ?  They  have  a  right  to 
propose,  and  we  have  a  right  civilly  to  give  our  reasons  against 
it — (surely  not  in  such  a  vulgar  style  as  David's  Oration,  par- 
ticularly in  German,  and  bombajst  as  in  English,  for  such 
would  be  thrown  out,  and  not  recorded  in  the  minutes.)  The 
fact,  upon  the  whole,  is,  you  may  print  what  you  please,  but 
you  cannot  call  it  the  standard  of  the  church,  to  be  occasion- 
ally laughed  at  by  religious  and  sensible  critics,  before  it  hath 
received  a  true  polish.  Sec.  3.  To  no  General  Synod  can  the 
power  be  committed,  to  prescribe  every  where  uniform  cere- 
moniesy  or  to  introduce  alterations  in  articles  of  faith,  or  in 
cases  which  embrace  the  manner  of  delivering  the  gospel  of 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  foundation  of  our  faith,  and 
which  might  oppress  the  consciences  of  the  brethren  in  Christ. 
Is  this  not  according  to  Luther,  and  Augsburg  Confession? 
Does  not  every  one  of  us  know  the  articles  of  our  faith  ?  Dare 
they  make  any  alterations  therein  ?  Is  not  our  liberty  respec- 
ting ceremonies  forever  secured  to  each  minister  and  congre- 
gation? Twisted  nonsense  cannot  change  the  above  words, 
Read  them,  and  think  for  yourselves. 

Art.'  3.  This  article  provides,  that  in  Pennsylvania,  where 
there  are  noW  eighty-odd  ministers,  more  synods  may  be  es^ 
tablished,  if  twenty-five  ministers  apply.  And  that  if  in  one 
state  no  synod  or  ministry  is  yet  established,  and  six  ordain^ 
ed  ministers  make  application,  the  General  Synod  shall 
permit  the  establishment  of  a  synod  in  each  state.  This  is  one 
commanding  authority  given  to  the  General  Synod.  You  shall, 
and  for  what  purpose  ?  They  must  allow  a  separate  synod  in 
every  state,  where  six  ministers  request  it.  Reflect  upon  this,, 
and  see  whether  the  General  Synod  can  oppress  the  members 
JDf  our  church  in  any  state.  But  the  article  goes  on  and  s-ays, 
u  But  until  the  formal  permission  and  admission  in  the  above 
cases  is  imparted,  no  deputies  from  a  self-created  or  new-cre- 
ated body  can  have  seat  and  voice  in  the  General  Synod." 
This  is  perfectly  consistent  with  good  order.  And  such  self- 
created  bodies  are  not  members  of  our  church.  We  want  no 
dictatorial  Bishops  among  us. 

Art.  4.  With  respect  to  the  degrees  in  the  ministerial  office^ 
tlie  General  Synod  imparts  to  th$  several  ministries  well  con% 


14 


sidered  advice,  in  which  time,  situation  and  place  is  well  con- 
sidered ;  and  that,  as  much  as  possible,  a  beneficial  uniformity 
among  the  preachers  is  kept  up.  GeneralSynod  will  also  endeavor 
to  advise  such  rules  and  regulations  among  the  different  synods, 
by  which  disagreeable  collisions,  which  eventually  may  exist  in  es- 
tablished degrees  in  the  office,  or  in  other  possible  cases,  may  be 
avoided.  Is  there  any  oppression  here  ?  No  :  All  is  broth- 
erly advice,  and  only  relates  to  the  ministers ;  so  that  when 
they  move  from  one  state  to  the  other,  they  may  stand  as  high 
in  the  one  as  in  the  other.  It  is,  however,  very  doubtful 
whether  an  unauthorised  ordination,  performed  under  a  tree^ 
conveys  any  degree  at  all ;  and,  according  to  David's  doctrine, 
in  his  libel,  he  says,  "  what  is  once  radically  wrong,  can  never 
be  cured."    Out  of  thy  own  mouth  wilt  thou  be  judged. 

Art.  5.  General  Synod  shall  not  properly  be  viewed  as  a  tri- 
bunal of  appeal;  but  yet  it  takes  cognizance  of  the  following 
cases,  and  in  manner  following:  1.  It  may,  on  accusation 
respecting  doctrine  and  discipline,  which,  by  whole  synods  or 
congregations,  or  individual  ministers,  are  brought  before  them, 
give  their  opinion  and  advice.  But  General  Synod  shall,  with 
great  care  and  foresight,  pay  attention  that  the  consciences  of 
the  ministers  are  not  oppressed  with  human  traditions,  and 
that  no  person  be  afflicted  respecting  differences  of  opinion. 
Here  is  again  opinion,  advice — no  dictatorial  command,  no 
Pope.  If  true  doctrine  is  preached,  respecting  small  differ- 
ences no  brotherly  love  shall  be  enclouded ;  every  minister 
may  there  complain,  every  congregation,  every  synod ;  and 
they  will  receive  advice.  David  may  go  there,  if  he  is  a  Lu- 
theran minister,  and  hear  advice  about  his  doctrine  respecting 
the  human  presence  of  Jesus  in  the  Eucharist,  respecting  his 
sin-forgiving  power,  &c.  But  our  synod  may  also  complain 
of  such  creatures  as  David.  The  next  section  speaks  more 
plain.  2.  If  disunited  parties  respecting  doctrine  and  disci- 
pline submit  their  differences  in  a  brotherly  manner  to  the  Gen- 
eral Synod,  the  same  shall,  after  strict  examination,  and  ac- 
cording to  their  view  of  right,  equity,  brotherly  love  and  truth, 
declare  its  opinion.  Can  there  be  any  thing  more  christian- , 
like  ?  Every  person  or  party  submitting,  in  a  brotherly  man- 
ner, their  differences,  shall  receive  attention,  and  a  decision  ac- 
cording to  their  view  of  justice.  3.  Should  differences  arise 
between  synods  and  synods,  the  decision  is  had  by  voting  by 
synods,  and  the  synods  at  variance  have  there  no  vote.  This 
is  consistent  with  sound  reason.  But  such  differences  can  sel- 
dom happen.  But  they  shall  do  justice,  if  the  case  is  refer- 
red to  them. 

'  Art.  6,  The  General  Synod  may  form  plans  for  a  general 


seminary,  and  missis  (among  heathen,)  for  the  support  of 
ministers'  widows,  and  poor  ministers  ;  and  prepare  to  have 
them  effected  or  brought  into  operation,  with  the  assistance  of 
God,  Can  you  say  any  thing  against  giving  the  General  Synod 
leave  to  form  plans,  if  they  will,  for  the  above  purposes  ?  If 
they  have  leave  to  form  plans,  will  they  try  to  execute  these 
plans  without  seeking  the  assistance  of  their  constituents  > 
And  who  are  the  constituents?  Answer:  The  synods  of  the 
states. 

Art-  7.  The  General  Synod  may. also-  establish  a  general  fund, 
to  effect  its  purposes.  How  will  they  establish  funds  ?  Can 
they  order  you  to  pay  a  certain  sum?  No:  they  will  depend 
on  free  donations,  on  testamentary  devices  f  and,  in  order  that 
such  donations  and  devices  may  be  properly  applied,  according 
tp  the  intent  of  the  donor,  they  will  establish  the  regulation 
and  application  of  the  same.  And  if  you  ask  your  oldest  sons, 
to  whom  you  may  give  half  an  acre  of  ground  annually*  for  the 
purpose  of  applying  the  proceeds  to  some  good  purpose  foir 
the  general  benefit  of  the  church,  would  you  think  it  improp- 
erly applied  if  he  said,  "The  produce  of  my  half  acre  I  wiil 
give  to  the  general  fund,  to  assist  the  poor  servant  of  the  Lord: 
to  effect  the  salvation  of  immortal  souls,  at  home  or  abroad,  as 
they  see  cause  ;  and  six  cents  out  of  that  half  acre's  value  I 
will  apply  towards  the  travelling  expenses  of  the  deputies  from 
our  synod  to  the  General  Synod" — surely  you  will  say,  Well 
done,  my  lad ! 

Art.  8.  The  General  Synod  shall,  according  to  their  best 
ability,  and  with  the  supplicated  assistance  of  God,  operate  in 
such  a  manner  that  schisms  among  us  may  be  prevented ;  and 
to  watch  incessantly,  and  to  pay  constant  attention  to  the  situa- 
tion of  the  times,  and  the  growing  opinions  of  the  christian 
churqh  in  general,^  in  order  to  make  use  of  every  opportunity 
to  assist  in  healing  the  already  existing  differences,  and  to  the 
furtherance  of  the  general  union  and  concord.  Is  it  possible 
that  any  christian  can  have  any  thing  against  this  article  ?  Our 
Saviour  says,  Thereby  will  every  body  know  that  you  are  my 
disciples,  if  you  love  one  another.  Whosoever,  then,  writes^ 
speaks  and  and  acts  in  order  to  oppose  love  and  union,  which 
will  exist  in  heaven,  and  where  the  redeemed  from  all  quar- 
ters of  the  earth  will  form  a  united  whole,  notwithstanding 
their  different  opinions  here,  is  not  Christ's  disciple. 

The  above  are  all  the  enacting  clauses  of  the  constitution  : 
the  rest  is  only  regulations  of  the  officers  and  the  business  of 
the  synod,  which  are  uniform  with  all  other  such  bodies,  only 


*  Gemein  werdende  .Gesimungen, 


16 


with  this  difference,  that  the  President  of  the  General  Synod 
hath  no  casting  vote,  but  only  a  general  one.  The  minutes  of 
that  synod  contain  some  other  necessary  resolutions,  naturally 
arising  out  of,  and  in  conformity  with,  the  constitution.  And 
as  the  synod  supposed  that  three  of  the  synods  there  represen- 
ted would  adopt  the  constitution,  and  that  it  would  of  course 
go  into  operation,  and  meet  again  next  October,  and  then,  at 
least,  once  in  three  years — committees  were  appointed  to  report 
a  plan  for  a  general  seminary,  missionary  purposes,  &c. 

Nothing  further  is  necessary  to  be  added,  to  prevent  foul 
suspicions  to  take  root  against  your  deputies  who  concurred 
with  the  above  constitution,  as  they  disinterestedly  believed  it 
for  your  welfare. 


LET  US  PROCEED  TO  REVIEW  DAVID'S  PAMPHLET. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  take  up  your  time  to  read  why  our  sy- 
nod assembled  in  April,  1819,  on  the  second  Sunday  after  Eas- 
ter. This  is  sufficiently  stated  in  our  minutes  of  that  year,  and 
again  repeated  by  way  of  extract  in  the  minutes  of  1820,  and 
hath  been  twice  sanctioned  by  a  unanimous  vote  of  those  pres- 
ent, who  were  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  whole  body.  And 
they  had,  of.  course,  a  right  to  alter  the  constitution,  on  which 
so  much  stress  is  laid.  And  it  is  evident,  that  if  two-thirds 
agreed  at  their  home  to  meet  at  that  time,  they  consented  to 
the  alteration  ;  for  the  constitution  does  not  confine  the  mem- 
bers of  the  synod  to  alter  the  same  only  when  they  are  met. 
Nothing  shall,  therefore,  here  be  said  to  justify  our  meeting  in 
the  tune  that  David  sings  from.  It  is,  to  sensible  beings,  not 
worthy  to  be  mentioned. 

Some  observations  may,  however,  be  necessary  on  the  meet- 
ing which  is  now  by  him  called  their  proper  meeting,  which  he 
describes,  page  20,  &c.  This  much  is  known,  that  the  Rev. 
Daniel  Moser,  although  dragged  along  from  his  home  to  give  to 
their  meeting  a  color,  did  take  no  part  with  them  in  their  farce, 
although  there  (David  like)  mentioned  as  if  he  did.  They 
met*  as  it  is  stated — and  who  ?  Philip  Henkel,  the  only  ordain- 
ed minister — (and  the  constitution  in  Luther  says,  synods  con- 
sist of  ordained  ministers  and  candidates) — of  course,  of  each 
sort  more  than  one.  He,  candidate  Bell,  and  catechet  David, 
constitute  this  synod,  The  first  thing  they  do  is  this,  they  send 
a  vulgar  letter  to  the  senior  and  President  of  our  church,  the 


if 

Rev.  Mr.  Storke,  calling  upon  him  to  act  as  such.  Shame  on 
you,  David !  You  use  the  blessed  name  of  Jesus  in  that  letter, 
and  in  the  same  breath  give  a  mutilated  answer  from  him,  so 
as  to  suit  your  present  purposes*  And  you  forget  to  mention, 
that  he  sent  you  word  how  the  candidates  in  Tennessee,  and 
every  where,  would  have  their  licenses  renewed,  and  in  what 
manner  the  school  in  Tennessee  would  be  supported.  But 
see  appendix.  It  is  surprising  that  Philip  could  write  thus, 
and  sign  his  nartie.  But  it  is  understood  who  stirred  the  whirl 
of  the  mudpuddle. 

But  for  the  better  understanding  of  our  differences,  you  will 
please  to  attend  to  the  following  relation  of  facts  ;  you  will 
thereby  judge  for  yourselves  whether  we  acted  as  became 
us,  and  whether  injustice  was  done  to  David,  for  this  is  his 
main  object  ;  And  because  he  will  not  state  to  you  the  causes 
of  his  rebellion,  and  does  not  mention  a  word  of  what  he  stood 
and  stands  accused  of,  you  ought  to  know  it. 

When  David  was  quite  young  his  brother  gave  him  license 
to  preach,  contrary  to  all  rule.  As  such  he  was  introduced  to 
us  at  the  Organ  Church,  in  order  to  obtain  regular  license,  which, 
out  of  respect  to  his  father  and  brother,  was  reluctantly  consent- 
ed to,  for  he  was  too  young  ;  and  during  the  same  session  a  rule 
was  made,  that  no  person  under  21  years  old  should  receive 
license,  and  then  only  by  Synod.  At  a  succeeding  Synod, 
complaint  was  made  against  him  of  indecent  conduct,  and  by  " 
a  resolution  of  the  Synod  the  Secretary  reprimanded  him  open- 
ly.   From  that  time  malice  remained  in  his  heart. 

At  our  Synod  in  1816,  he  applied  for  ordination.  In  the 
committee  where  the  petitions  supporting  the  application  were 
considered,  Philip,  his  brother,  was  the  first  who  opposed  his 
ordination ;  and  the  committee  reported  that  Daniel  Moser 
should  be  ordained  in  one  of  his  congregations,  and  the  other 
applicants,  David,  Mr.  Bell,  and  others,  should  be  licensed. 
Before  this  could  be  approved  of  by  Synod,  the  report  respect- 
ing licenses  was,  with  shameful  audacity,  spurned  at  and  refu- 
sed by  David  and  others,  who  were  brought  to  that  Synod  for 
the  purpose,  under  the  cloak  of  deputies,^  thinking  thereby  to 
force  us  to  ordain.  They  threatened  to  break  off  from  us  if 
we  did  not— for  their  assertion  was,  that  none  had  a  right  to 
administer  sacraments  except  hands  were  laid  on  him.f  Here 
we  were  in  a  dilemma  ;  and  in  order,  if  possible,  to  prevent  a 

*  See  Minutes  of  1816,  page  10,  &c.  where  the  case  is  reported  as  tenderly 
as  possible. 

f  And  now  David,  in  his  pamphlet,  page  34,  quotes  Luther,  who  is  made  to 
say,  that  if  a  boy  administers  the  sacrament,  the  receiver  receives  the  proper 
•sacrament. 


iccession  and  to  keep  peace,  it  was  proposed  and  resolvedf, 
that  when  the  candidates  receive  their  licenses,  which  were 
for  one  year  only,  they  should  receive  the  hands  of  a  mortal 
on  their  heads,  in  conformity  to  the  license.  This  was  done.5^ 
But  during  the  same  evening,  in  the  house  of  Mr.  Sherer, 
David  proved  already  that  mortal  hands  could  not  convey  a 
heavenly  spirit,  especially  when  the  recipient  is  possessed  of 
other  spirits ;  for  he  there  said,  "  Now  I  defy  them.:.I  am  or- 
dained now"~or  words  to  that  effect.  And  Philip  was  of  the 
same  opinion,  as  appeared  by  his  questions  on  the  next  day. 
They  acted  for  some  time  under  such  infatuation,  and  also 
prevented  Mr.  Moser,  during  that  year,  from  receiving  ordi- 
nation. But  perhaps,  by  looking  into  their  license,  they  were 
Cured  of  their  error* 

During  that  Synod,  and  principally  by  the  Henkels,  it  was 
enforced  as  of  the  utmost  consequence,  that  we  should  print 
an  English  book  containing  our  doctrine,  discipline,  and  the 
origin  of  our  church— see  minutes,  1816,  page  13.  At  the 
next  year's  Synod,  the  Secretary  reported  a  book  in  compliance 
with  the  charge  given.  He,  in  compiling  the  same,  now  called 
Luther,  examined  no  manuscript  in  his  possession,  but  was 
governed  by  a  compilation  of  rules  made  since  the  year  1803, 
edited  and  printed  by  the  Rev.  Paul  Henkel,  and  he  had  no 
cause  to  doubt  its  validity— in  which  compilation,  the  word 
constitution  is  no  where  to  be  found.  The  Secretary,  there- 
fore, took  the  liberty  to  call  the  standing  articles  u  Constitu- 
tion,55 and  added  the  1st  and  13th  articles  of  his  own  accord, 
which  are  in  no  manuscript  to  be  found.  This  book,  in  manu- 
script, was  examined  by  a  committee,  who  reported  it  as  ne* 
cessary  that  1500  copies  should  be  printed— see  minutes,  1817, 
page  10 — with  the  rules  made  during  this  session ;  and  when 
the  expense  was  considered  as  too  great,  Philip  Henkel  enga- 
ged to  take  500  of  them.... upon  which  the  report  was  adopted. 
This  is  all  the  ratification  it  received.  Now  please  to  attend. 
On  Monday  the  Manuscript  was  handed  in  for  examination  ; 
on  Wednesday  the  time  of  the  Synod's  meeting  was  changed 
from  October  to  Trinity,  1819  ;f  of  course  that  could  not  have 
been  a  constitutional  article  in  the  manuscript  approved  on  the 
same  day,  yet  prior  to  the  alteration — but  it  was  to  be  inser- 
ted in  the  book  as  a  new  thing.  When,  then,  the  book  was 
finishing  for  the  press,  it  was  by  mistake  added  to  the  second 

**  *  Our  President  opposed  it,  as  contrary  to  our  church  government,  and 
succumbing  to  rebellious  youngsters ;  but  he  submitted,  being  outvoted. 

f  I  am  surprised  that  you  did  not  see  in  Luther,  article  2,  according  to  your 
father's  compilation,  that  we  were  to  meet  annually :  And  surely  we  did  noj; 
meet  in  1818.   And  constitution  is  your  cry ! ! 


19 


article  of  the  constitution,  and  has  nothing  to  do  there  p  it  k 
liable  at  all  times,  and  every  year,  to  be  changed  and  deter- 
mined when  and  where  the  meeting  is  to  take  place.  On  this 
point,  now,  David  builds  the  unconstitutionality  of  our  Synod 
in  April,  1819,  and  justifies  the  proceedings  of  his  caucus 
meeting.  Surely  it  stands  him  in  hand  to  whitewash  his  char- 
acter ;  and  if  he  cannot  do  it  in  a  manly  manner,  he  shows 
that  he  can  do  it  by  twisted  nonsense;  for  no  sensible  or  honest 
man  will  screen  himself  under  such  subterfuge,  when  he  know$ 
that  all  the  preachers  had  notice,  and  of  the  reason,  of  the 
earlier  meeting.  The  Rev.  Paul  Henkel  had  notice,  and 
promised  to  come- — his  letter  can  be  shown:  notice  to  Philip 
Henkel,  with  the  cause,  was  evident  by  his  letter  which  he 
wrote  to  me  and  others,  to  April  Synod :  Mr.  Bell  owned 
that  he  had  notice.  Now  the  ministers  all  met  in  April,  with 
their  deputies,  except  Philip  and  those  whom  he  leads  ;  and 
all  present  approved  of  the  meeting  and  its  cause — See  the 
minutes  of  1819.  Now  if  the  book  called  Luther  is  authority 
in  one  case,  it  is  (being  cited  by  David  in  his  support)  also 
authority  on  the  other  side  ;  of  course,  what  is  there  asserted, 
page  169,  where  it  says,  "  Constitution,  rules  and  regulations,, 
are  always  subject  to  be  altered,  amended,  extended,  or  ex- 
plained, as  situations,  times  and  laws  change,  as  the  object  is 
thereby  to  assist  practical  Christianity &c.  is  surely  valid* 
The  13th  article  of  the  constitution,  page  156,  says,  "this  con- 
stitution can  be  altered  or  amended,  when  two-thirds  of  all 
ministers  and  deputies  agreed  Will  it  be  denied  that  two- 
thirds  of  the  regular  members  of  the  Synod  were  present  in 
April,  1819?  If  not,  had  they  not  absolute  right  to  alter 
that  article,  and  cure  all  defects  i  And  they  cured,  also,  the 
defect  of  not  meeting  in  1818,  which  was  imperative  by  the 
second  article,  page  153. 

It  is  true  that  an  approved  constitution  was  denied  on  Mon- 
day, at  Lincolnton  Synod,  1820.  But  it  was,  at  the  same 
time,  openly  admitted  that  the  rules,  according  to  Paul's  com- 
pilation, and  which  are  now  called  constitution,  were  as  bind- 
ing on  the  church  as  a  constitution,  until  they  were  repealed  or 
altered.  When,  however,  the  Rev.  R.  J.  Miller,  on  Tuesday, 
insisted  that  there  had  been  a  constitution  written  with  his 
own  hands,  and  which,  on  searching  the  rusty  manuscripts, 
was  found  correct,  the  Secretary  as  openly  acknowledged  his 
error — on  which  such  stress  was  laid  as  if  the  heavens  were 
dissolving.  But  all  this  constitutional  jargon,  whether  the 
April  Synod  is  valid  or  not,  is  worthy  of  no  attention,  as  will 
be  perceived  by  the  following  questions :  Did  you,  David, 
not  meet  there  with  deputies  from  your  flock  ?   Did  you  op,- 


20 


pose  the  meeting  at  the  opening  as  unconstitutional  ?  When 
the  question  was  whether  this  meeting  is  approved,  did  you 
and  your  deputies  say  nay  ?    Was  there  then  any  opposition  I 
When  your  case  came  on,  did  you  plead  to  the  jurisdiction, 
and  say  we  had  no  right  to  try  you  ?    Did  you  not  bring  your 
witnesses  and  certificates  along?    Does  this  not  prove  that 
you  knew  what  you  would  be  charged  with  ?    Did  not  you,  a 
few  weeks  before,  excommunicate  a  man,  erroneously  believ- 
ing that  when  you  disowned  him  he  could  not  be  a  witness 
against  you  ?    Did  not  you  defend  yourself  with  virulence  as 
to  the  complaints  against  you  ?    Do  you  not  remember,  that 
the  first  proposition  was  that  you  should  be  silenced  a  year  I 
Did  we  not,  merely  on  the  request  and  prayer  of  your  wife 
and  deputies,  (as  you  would  have  been  without  bread,  and  the 
congregation  without  preaching,)  reconsider  our  resolution, 
and  give  you  catechet  license  ?  Answer  this.    This  license  you 
did,  at  Lincoln,  boast  of ;  and  now  in  your  book,  page  23,  &c. 
produce  it  as  evidence  of  your  good  character*    Have  you  not 
bid  defiance  to  shame  ?    You  know  these  licenses  are  printed, 
sound  alike,  and  your  father  is  the  author.    And  what  does 
this  license  say  ?....viz  :    "  That  you  was  examined  with  res- 
pect to  your  knowledge  and  capacity,  and,  in  consequence 
thereof,"  (of  what  ?....of  the  examination,)  &c.  &c.    Is  there 
any  thing  here  of  your  good  moral  character  ?   And  you  know 
that  you  would  not  have  obtained  this,  if  we  had  not  received 
your  open  disavowal  and  denial  (and  we  winked  at  this  only 
for  peace  sake,  for  it  was  proven)  of  having  preached  doctrines 
of  the  mostdisgraceful  kind,  and  your  assertion  that  you  never 
believed  such,  and  would  never  preach  them — See  minutes, 
1819,  page  11.    In  those  minutes  it  was  expressly  said,  that 
we  found  the  charges  exhibited  against  you  true-*    Now  did 
you  not  submit  to  the  final  decision  ?    Did  not  you  show  a 
momentary  consciousness  of  our  lenity  ?    Did  we  not  separate 
in  peace  ?    Did  we  not,  for  peace  sake,  say  we  would  write  a 
friendly  letter  to  your  congregation,  on  application  ?    Did  you 
not  preach  under  that  license      (for  otherwise,  according  to 
your  own  doctrine,  you  had  no  authority,  as  there  was  no  Sy- 
nod in  1818,  and  we  had  no  right  to  give  you  one  in  1819,  for 
you  say  all  we  did  was  void.)    With  all  your  twisting  and 
turning,  it  is  evident,  that  if  we  had  rejected  Mr.  Hoyle's  ap- 
plication for  justice,  had  disbelieved  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hall  and 
others,  discarded  certificates  and  depositions  against  you,  and 

*  We  onty  went  on  the  charges  of 'Squire  Hoyle,  and  proof,  and  not  on  the 
exhibits  of  forgetfulness  in  swearing,  which  was  too  shocking  for  us  to  delibe- 
rate on.  The  paragraph  in  the  minutes  was  so  worded  for  peace  sake  j  and 
the  readers  can  now,  by  tjie  appendix,  judge  for  themselves. 


21 


ordained  you  a, Bishop,  we  should  have  the  disgrace  of  being 
called  by  you  honest  men  :  You  would  have  called  our  Synod 
constitutional ;  and  we  should  have  heard  nothing  about  the 
whore  of  Rome,  the  Pope,  Antichrist ;  nor  would  you  and 
your  father  jointly  have  proclaimed  untruths,  and  declare  that 
we  wronged  you.  All  would  have  been  welL  But  as  we 
acted  wrong,  as  you  now  say,  and  appeal  to  the  public,  we  must 
exhibit  the  proof  against  you  in  public — See  appendix.  Let 
the  public  now  judge. 

The  farce  of  a  trial  you  mention,  page  26,  where  our  proof 
was  not,  nor  Mr,  Hoyle's,  is  to  sensible  readers  mere  fudge,, 
What !  more  than  a  year  alter  our  decision,  and  months  after 
the  exhibits  in  the  Star  of  May  20,  a  few  men  certify.. ..and 
what?    "That,  because  they  then  find  no  greater  fault  with 
you  than  hitherto,  they* can  by  no  means  think  of  dismissing 
you."    Tnis,  after  examining  credible  witnesses,  is  all  they 
say  in  your  justification.    They  might  as  well  have  said  your 
conduct  was  always  bad ;  we  knew  you  to  speak  lies,  but  as 
you  don't  now  behave  worse,  nor  increase  in  perverting  truths, 
we  will  keep  you*    But  perhaps  they  would  not  sign  a  more 
explicit  exculpation ;  for  that  you  and  your  father  had  propa- 
gated falsehoods  against  ministers,  and  your  certifying  to 
things'  which  must  have  happened  years  before  your  birth, 
must  have  been  known  to  them.    But  you  proceed  and  bring 
forward  a  select  council,  (selected,  no  doubt,  by  you,)  and  that 
council  sanctions  the  above  in  its  full  insignificancy,  and  adds, 
*'  that  all  the  charges  exhibited  against  you  have  not  in  the 
least  lessened  your  good  reputation  in  their  view?'*  Strange 
beyond  conception!    Surely  the  charges  can  have  no  effect 
upon  an  honest  jury.    But  they  say  nothing  about  proof,  &c. 
Who  these  men  are  which  you  mention,  page  26,  is  not  known 
to  your  readers ;  or  whether  they  all  signed  it,  or  whether  they 
are  more  renowned  for  veracity  than  those  who  tried  you,  and 
signed  the  other  paper,  and  who,  it  seems,  wanted  this  prop  to 
establish  their  credit,  their  neighbors,  no  doubt,  will  inquire. 

This  digression  was  necessary  for  a  clear  understanding : 
And  now,  dear  readers,  it  surely  is  sufficiently  established,  that 
David  can  say  nothing  against  the  constitutionality  of  the  April 
Synod ;  for  he  acted  under  it,  he  voted  with  us,  and  approved 
of  the  meeting.  But  you  ought  to  know  something  more 
against  him :  Philip  his  brother,  and  his  father,  proving  to  you 
that  they  acted  under  the  resolution  of  our  Synod. 

At  our  Synod  in  April,  in  order,  if  possible,  to  prevent  the 
farce  acted  on  Trinity,  and  which  was  threatened  by  Philip, 
we  resolved  that  the  absent  candidates  in  Tennessee  should 
have  their  licenses  renewed,  with  directions  by  whom*  We 


22 

also  appointed  (see  minutes,  page  9  to  14)  the  Rev.  Messrs 
Storke,  R.  J.  Miller,  and  Paul  Henkel,  or  a  majority  of  them? 
to  assist  the  school  in  Tennessee  with  money  in  Philip's  hands, 
due  by  him  for  the  500  books  above  mentioned,  if  (N.  B.)  si 
constitution  is  laid  before  them,  of  which  they  could  expect 
that  it  would  be  approved  by  our  next  Synod,  This  was 
Imown  to  the  farce-meeting  by  information  from  Mr.  Storke ; 
but  David  is  shamefully  silent  as  to  that  part,  in  his  statement 
of  the  answer  sent  there  by  Mr.  Storke*  The  above  resolu- 
tions were  likewise  sent  to  Philip  by  post,  to  Greenville,  Ten. 
as  soon  as  our  Synod  was  over,  in  order  to  show  to  our  mem" 
bers  there,  and  the  inspectors  of  the  school,  that  these  things 
were  not  forgotten.  But  now,  in  order  to  deprive  us  of  the 
money  in  Philip's  hands,  they  made  a  like  order  when  they 
met,^  omitting  the  Rev.  Mr.  Storke,  and  say — u  If  a  constitu- 
tion is  presented  to  the  Rev.  R.  J.  Miller  and  Paul  Henkel, 
and  they  approve  of  it,  it  shall  be  the  constitution,  and  the 
money  collected  shall  be  given  to  it."  See  the  resolution  in 
our  minutes,  1819,  page  14,  and  compare  it  with  David's  libel, 
page  22-9,  farce-meeting.  It  is  a  crafty  resolution  on  their 
part,  to  cloak  dishonesty.  Let  it  be  explained.  At  our  meet* 
ing  in  1817,  (see  minutes,)  we  promised  to  exert  ourselves  to 
obtain  donations  for  an  establishment  where  ministers  might 
be  educated  ;  and  we  believed  that  the  school  in  Tennessee 
would  be  such  a  one.  The  Rev.  R.  J.  Miller  received  a  con- 
siderable sum  for  that  purpose  from  our  church  members  in 
Charleston  ;  and  ail  donations  on  this  account  received,  amoun- 
ted to  g246  73,  which  was  paid  to  the  treasurer  in  April,  1819. 
But  as  he  had  borrowed  money  on  interest  to  pay  for  the  book 
called  Luther,  and  Philip  Henkel  had  engaged  to  take  500 
copies,  the  money  received  as  a  donation  was  applied  to  dis- 
charge part  of  the  debt  contracted  for  the  book,  in  order  to  re- 
duce the  interest.  And  as  Philip  had  500  of  these  books  in 
his  hands,  so  that  if  the  president  or  treasurer  drew  an  order 
on  him  for  the  amount  of  the  donation,  it  was  where  it  was 
supposed  it  might  be  wanted,  if  it  could  be  applied  to  that 
school.  Now  in  the  fall  of  1818,  Mr.  Bell  wrote  to  the  trea- 
surer, applying  for  money  for  said  school  ;  but  in  that  letter 
things  were  stated  which  made  it  evident,  that,  without  an 
adopted  constitution  for  said  school  by  our  Synod,  the  dona- 
tion would  be  thrown  away — and  the  school  is  now  evapo- 
rated. The  treasurer  had  no  order  from  the  previous  Synod 
to  order  or  pay  money  for  that  purpose,  and  he  informed  Mr. 

*  But  it  is  believed  that  David  fabricated  that  order  since  he  saw  our  last 
minutes,  to  give  to  the  money  matter  a  cloak,  for  the  bystanders  at  thej£ 
larce-meeting  heard  no  such  order  made; 


23 

Bell  thereof ;  and  further  advised  him,  as  hid  own  opinion* 
that  without  a  constitution  approved  of  by  the  Synod,  so  that 
It  is  shown  that  said  school  is  to  raise  ministers  for  our  church 
also,  no  support  ought  to  be  expected  from  Synod  from  the 
above  donation.  (To  insert  here  the  treasurer's  letter  is  use- 
less:  he  laid  a  copy  before  the  Synod  in  1819;  it  was  there 
approved,  and  was  the  cause  of  the  resolutions  above  stated.) 
Since  that  letter,  no  correspondence  with  Philip  took  place. 
But  is  it  not  evident  to  you,  that  they  acted  on  our  resolution 
for  the  purpose  of  keeping  the  value  of  most  of  the  500  books 
in  their  hands  ?  See  how  Philip  and  Paul  acted.  Mr.  Bell 
laid  a  constitution  before  Mr.  Miller,  (Mr.  Storke  they  avoi- 
ded,) and  he,  as  he  reported  to  us,  believed  that,  with  a  few 
exceptions,  it  would  be  approved  by  Synod.  N.  B.  Mr,  Miller 
acted  under  our  resolution,  and  not  under  the  farce  imitation. 
Mr.  Bell,  like  an  honest  man,  asked  no  more  than  $  36  75  for 
books  purchased.  Paul  was  not  present ;  and  as  Mr.  Miller 
alone  was  not  authorised  to  pay  money,  and  he  and  Paul  being 
far  apart,  he  signed  a  blank  order,  expecting  that  when  Paul 
approved  of  the  constitution,  as  he  had  done,  the  order  on 
Philip  would  be  filled  up  with  the  sum  requested  by  Mr.  Bell. 
But  in  order  to  keep  the  money  in  their  hands,  Paul,  or  some- 
body for  him,  (which  I  believe  to  be  the  case,)  in  order  to 
grasp  the  whole  from  our  farther  disposition,  filled  up  the  or- 
der with  S246  75,  for  the  purpose  of  depriving  your  treasury, 
which,  my  friends,  ought  to  be  under  your  direction  in  Synod, 
of  8210:  and  this  order  was  accepted,  to  be  paid  by  Philip* 
The  purpose,  however,  did  not  succeed,  through  the  honesty 
of  Mr.  Bell,  who  received  no  more  than  he  originally  deman- 
ded, viz.  $3&  75 ;  and  he  endorsed  the  accepted  order  by 
Philip  to  our  Synod.  This  is  only  related,  to  prove  to  you 
that  they  acted  under  the  order  of  our  Synod  of  April ;  of 
course,  they  thereby  acknowledged  the  validity,  for  their  pur- 
pose :  and  if  in  one  case  it  is  valid,  it  is  in  all.  Whether  they 
acted  honest  in  this  or  not,  is  for  you  to  decide.^    If,  then, 

*  By  a  letter  which  I  received  from  Tennessee,  June  23,  1821,  and  which 
has  no  date,  but  is  supposed  to  be  written  in  May,  I  found  a  memorial  inclo- 
sed to  our  Synod ;  which,  of  course,  came  too  late.  This  memorial  is,  with 
others,  signed  by  Philip  Henkel :  and  they  now  say  that  they  conformed  ta 
our  resolution  of  April,  1819,  and  that  they  laid  a  constitution  before  the  com- 
mittee by  us  appointed,  and  which  was  approved  by  them.  But  if  these  gen- 
tlemen would  read  again,  they  would  find  that  our  committee  was  not  author- 
ised to  any  thing  else  but  to  judge  of  the  probability  that  our  Synod  would 
approve  of  it,  &c.  But  no  constitution  was  laid  before  us  in  Lincolnton.  The 
fact,  however,  is,  (if  David  is  to  be  believed,  when  he  describes  the  farce- 
meeting,)  that  they  appointed  another  committee,  and  but  two,  and  say,  when 
these  two  approve  of  a  constitution^  it  shali  be  the  constitution— which  is  a 
<Juite  different  thingr 


24 


you  have  acted  under  our  Synod,  how  can  you  now  appear 
before  any  man  of  sense>  and  justify  your  establishing  a  sepa>- 
rate  conclave  ?  You  repeat  the  question  again,  page  39,  5, 
What  is  a  Synod  ?  You  are  already  answered,  and  mjust  be 
answered  again,  by  our  constitution,  Luther,  page  153,  article 
ii  :  u  It  consists  of  ordained  ministers  and  candidates/*  This, 
surely,  must  be  more  than  one  of  each  sort.  N.  B. — David 
must  be  confined  to  the  words  of  the  book,  by  his  own  example* 
Now,  according  to  his  effrontery,  he  gives  us  a  journal  of 
their  meeting,  page  20.  Let  us  examine  the  report,  and  see 
what  we  can  make  of  it.  He  surely  thinks  that  he  hath  fools, 
•dumkoepfe,  and  no  other  bystanders,  for  readers  ;  and  that  there 
were  but  his  own  creatures.  Reader,  you  may  smile,  but  it 
cannot  be  avoided :  their  proceedings  must  be  reviewed  ac* 
cording  to  David's  statement.  Here,  then,  comes  the  Rev. 
Philip  Henkel,  the  only  ordained  minister,  (for  Daniel  Moser 
had  no  part  in  their  proceedings,)  and  candidate  Bell :  they 
meet  at  Trinity,  in  1819 — (and  they  ought  to  have  met  in 
1818,  according  to  article  5,  if  they  are  reforming  Luther:) 
the  first  thing  is  to  elect  a  President  and  Secretary  ;  then  Mr. 
Bell  is  the  constitutional  elector  ;  and  as  the  office  can  only 
be  filled  by  an  ordained  one,  of  course  Philip  must  be  elec- 
ted...  by  Mr.  Bell  !  But  there  is  also  a  Secretary  want- 
ing, and  he  must  also  be  an  ordained  minister.  Here  we  are 
stopped.  Well,  somebody  must  be  ordained  :  this  is  a  ques- 
tion with  the  ministry  alone  ;  a  committee  must  be  appointed  ; 
it  can  be  nobody  but  Philip,  tor  Mr.  Bell  and  David  claim  or- 
dination. Here  Philip  holds  conference  with  himself,  reads 
petitions — (no  doubt  fulsomely  enough  worded  ;)  he  highly 
approves  of  the  theological  treatises,  (no  doubt  on  the  Pope  or 
Antichrist,  by  David,)  and  he  reports  to  the  Synod,  (who  is 
it  ?  Mr,  Bell  and  catechet  David,)  that  he  thinks  them  worthy 
of  ordination.  No  doubt  the  Synod  concurred  with  this  re- 
port :  and  at  it  they  go.  The  church  not  being  open,  and  Mr. 
Moser  not  connecting  himself,  Philip  alone  had  to  perform  it, 
contrary  to  all  rule  and  decency,  under  an  oak  tree.  He  laid 
hands  on  both.  Then  David  elects  Mr.  Bell  (who  signed  the 
proceedings,  at  least  in  print)  Secretary — for  the  President 
hath  only  a  casting  vote.  N.  B.  David,  you  cannot  say  that 
the  deputies  you  dragged  along  also  had  votes :  if  they  voted, 
it  is  nonsense  ;  and  all  had  but  two,  at  the  utmost.  Your  cry 
is  "  Constitution  !  Constitution  !  !"  Then  follow  it.  And  you 
know  that  the  question,  44 Ordination,  or  not?"  always  was  a 
ministerial  one  only. 

Now,  then,  Philip  is  President,  Bell  Secretary  ;  no  Treasu- 
rer appears  to  be  made:  but  no  doubt  it  is  understood  to  be 


25 


him  who  had  funds,  vifc.  i$QO  books  in  his  hands :  and  they 
command  him  how  to  act.  Now  they  say  they  have  three 
ministers  against  nine  of  our  Synod  in  April,  and  this  body 
arrogates  to  itself  all  the  powers  of  the  church,  and  say,  page 
39,  that  the  minority  is  in  duty  bound  to  coerce  the  majority 
to  obedience  !  !  Is  this  the  doctrine  of  Americans  ?  Can  you 
endure  such  despotism  ?  Where  is  the  Pope  now  ?  Was  this 
the  doctrine  of  heroic  Washington  and  philosophic  Jefferson? 
Page  19.  The  words  of  David  in  that  page,  ought  to  be  en- 
forced to  the  members  of  our  church  against  him  and  his  Da- 
than  principles-— namely,  "  Americans,  I  cannot  conclude  with- 
out alarming  you  a  little  more,  that  our  church  liberty,  privi- 
lege, order  and  regulations  are  endangered.  Behold  how 
many  dupes  there  are,"  &c*  Reflect,  then,  American  citizens, 
>and  say  whether  you  can  blame  any  person  for  calling  the 
above  described  meeting  a  farce-meeting  ;  and  compare  things 
as  your  christian  conscience  is  capable  of  doing. 

Thus  we  followed  David  according  to  his  own  report,  as  he 
printed  it ;  but  inquiry  was  made  of  bystanders  to  their  trans- 
actions, and  they  relate  a  different  story,  as  follows :  On  Mon- 
day of  their  meeting,  David  first  preached  a  very  inflammatory 
sermon  against  the  old  ministers,  trying  to  influence  the  hear- 
ers to  rage  against  them— (He  calls  it  a  sermon  on  Antichrist.) 
After  all  the  harangues  were  finished,  the  door  was  locked 
against  them;  and  the  question  was,  Shall  we  proceed?  And 
several,  especially  Mr.  Philip,  with  tears,  said,  We  better  quit, 
we  have  gone  far  enough.  A  gentleman  (not  of  our  church) 
from  Lincoln  said,  "  You  might  quit,  but  it  is  too  late  after 
David's  harangue."  Something  was  then  read,  of  which  the 
informant  took  no  notice— Philip  listening  mournfully  to,  per- 
haps, theological  treatises  and  petitions.  Mr*  Bell  was  already 
on  his  horse,  to  move  off ;  Philip  had  the  books  packed  up* 
and  it  appeared  as  if  good  sense  had  determined  them  to  quit, 
and  say,  We  will  go  no  further.  Then  David  jumped  up  in 
a  rage  from  the  log  he  was  sitting  on,  and  bawled  out,  Then 
I  will  be  none  6f  your  preachers. #  This  intimidated  Philip ; 
he  was  thunder  struck.  What!  (thinks  he,  no  doubt,)  to  lose 
such  a  defender  of  the  faith,  and  set  him  afloat !  That  must 
not  be.  Immediately  the  scene  was  changed ;  books  were 
unpacked ;  Mr.  Bell  got  down  ;  tears  flowed  from  Philip's 
eyes  ;  ordination  was  determined  on.. ..and,  instanter,  execu- 
ted, during  a  mournful  silence.  As  soon  as  that  was  over, 
David  bawled  out,  now  we  can  hold  conference  !  Here,  then, 
Synod  began  ;  but  it  was  by  packing  up  and  riding  homewards. 

*  He  saw  that  he  was  done  then — could  expect  no  bread— no  employ  as  a 
preacher  among"  us — no  chance  of  preaching  rebellion, 

4 


m 

This  is  from  information  of  more  creditable  persons  than  Da- 
vid and  his  description  of  their  meeting.  For  it  is  known  that 
Philip  is  a  tender  hearted  man  ;  but  suffers  himself,  against 
his  cool  conviction,  to  be  led  by  David,  who  can  call  even  his 
father  a  dumkoepfe  I 

But  notwithstanding  all  this,  our  object  was  to  have  peace* 
Our  minutes  of  1819  were  carefully  worded*  to  avoid  as  much 
as  possible,  consistent  with  truth,  unnecessary  irritation ; 
nothing  was  published  by  us  to  inflict  wounds,  although  we 
inew  that  attempts  were  made  by  David  to  embitter,  as  much 
as  possible,  the  flock  he  intends  to  govern ;  and  thus  we  met 
in  Lincolnton,  in  the  year  1820 — the  history  of  our  Synod  of 
that  year  is  before  you — to  which  the  following  questions,  for 
your  assurance  of  the  truth  therein  contained,  are  here  asked  : 
Will  you,  Paul,  David  and  Philip,  deny  that,  on  Monday  of 
Lincoln  Synod,  you  at  first  denied  us  the  church  ?  Dare  you 
to  deny  the  truth  of  the  general  relation  of  that  day  as  in  the 
minutes,  from  page  1  to  6  ?  Will  you  deny  that  David,  with  ef- 
frontery, acted  impertinently  I  (Or  have  you  had  no  education  ?) 
Will  you  deny  that  David  prevented  his  tender  brother  from 
uniting' with  us?  Will  you  deny  that  the  Rev.  Mr.  Storke 
offered  to  you  all  the  calamut  of  peace,  by  saying,  u  Faults  on 
both  sides  have  been  committed  ;  let  us  forget,  and  forgive, 
and  unite  ?"  Did  you,  David,  not  use  impertinent  language 
afterwards,  and  accuse  the  assembled  ministers  (two  of  them 
in  offices  before  you  was  born)  with  preaching  wrong  doctrine,- 
in  not  admitting  the  corporeal  humanity  of  the  Saviour  in  the 
Lord's  Supper  ?  Did  not  you  say,  We  will  not  submit  to  the 
majority?  Is  not  the  latter  part  of  that  description,  in  min- 
utes, page  f>,  true  ?  If  you  deny  these  questions,  then  I  refer 
the  readers  to  the  hundreds  of  witnesses  present,  and  to  the 
appendix. 

Let  us  proceed  to  review  his  reasons,  page  27,  as  far  as  they 
deserve  it.  Mr.  Bell,  page  26,  is  honored  by  the  only  civil 
complaint  in  the  whole  book.  Whether  his  saying  "  O,  elo- 
quent Bell !"  page  26,  is  to  soften  even  that,  or  whether  it  will 
increase  his  fame,  coming  from  such  a  quarter,  he  will  know 
best.  About  the  breach  of  the  constitution,  enough  has  been 
said.  But,  page  30  and  31,  David  discovers  his  malice,  and 
4i  determination  to  discredit  the  Rev.  Mr.  Storke,  and  particu- 
larly the  Secretary.  However,  both  deem  it  degrading  to 
themselves  to  say  any  thing  to  it ;  they  were  known  before 
Henkel  was  born  :  and  they  know  that  it  is  acknowledged  by 
every  one  present,  enemies  and  friends,  that  the  heaven  crying, 
sin  of  disowning  a  ratified  constitution,  was  as  openly  propi- 
tiated by  a  repeal  of  that  assertion,  with  \yhich  David's  own 


27 


deputies  {as  he  calls  them)  were  fully  satisfied :  and  surelyy 
every  honest  reader  also  will  be,  if  he  hath  flesh  and  blood, 
and  knows  that  when  errors  have  been  acknowledged,  they 
ought  and  will  never  be  repeated  except  by  demons.  But 
you  will  still  recollect  that,  as  it  is  explained  abov#,  the  2d 
article  of  the  constitution,  so  far  as  to  the  time  of  meeting  on 
Trinity,  hath  never  been  ratified  as  a  constitutional  article  be- 
fore the  Lincoln  Synod.     This  was  overlooked  when  error  was 
confessed ;  and  the  Secretary  now  says,  that  he  repents  of  hav- 
ing, for  peace  sake,  child-like  submitted  to  be  censured  by  a  res- 
pectable ministry,  as  if  the  heavens  were  tumbling  over  their 
heads  for  having  committed  and  cured  a  fault.    That  David^ 
in  his  note,  page  30,  wishes  to  make  Mr.  Stork e  appear  as  a 
tool  of  a  designing,  subtle  individual,  is  the  climax  of  mean- 
ness in  him  ;  and  it  would  be  honoring  him  to  say  more* 
Hearers  from  many  parts,  and  Salisbury,  who  heard  Mr.  Storke 
last  Easter,  can  judge  whether,  he  shewed  any  kind  of  weak- 
ness in  the  pulpit.    His  sermon  there  ought  to  be  published  £ 
and  it  would  have  a  more  salutary  effect  than  any  thing  David 
hath  said  or  can  say.    What  shall  we  say  to  the  third  part  of 
his  reasons,  on  the  letter  officially  written  to  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hilli 
Is  it  worth  while  to  attend  to  his  criticisms  ?    If  David  reads 
\.  Gor.  15,  14,  he  will  there  find  that  a  spiritual  body  (o£ 
course  invisible.. ..no  flesh  and  blood)  and  a  natural  body  do 
exist.    He  hath  often  cited  the  book  called  Luther,  as  author- 
ity in  our  church:  be  it  so:  then  read  that  book,  pages  205 
and  206,  &c.  and  see  whether  it  clashes  with  the  letter  to  Mr. 
Hill.    It  is  for  the  heart  and  believing  soul  what  the  Lord 
made  it;  he  said  to  his  disciples  who  believed  in  him,  saw* 
him,  touched  him,  u  take,  eat  my  body,"  &c.  ;  and  that  body 
was  afterwards  tormented  whole,  and  nailed  to  the  cvross.  If 
David  would  read  that  book,  page  208,  the  last  eight  lines 
from  below,  and  further  up,  he  would,  if  feeling  in  his  bosom^ 
find  the  application. 

David  insinuates  as  if  the  Secretary  had  designedly  trans- 
lated the  Augsburg  Confession  wrong.  Now  you  must  be 
informed,  that  When  the  manuscript  of  the  book  was  sent  to 
the  printer,  he  was  requested  to  insert  in  the  proper  place  the 
translated  Confession,  which  he  did;  and  it  was  translated 
before  our  time,  and  by  better  heads  and  scholars  than  either 
David  or  his  father  shew  to  possess.  Pray  read  Luther's 
words  to  the  formal  christians,  (book  Luther,  page  206  ;)  u  You 
unbelievers  and  servants  of  Satan,  if  you  partake  of  the  sacra- 
ment you  do  not  partake  in  any  other  manner  than  the  cloth 
or  cup  in  which  it  is  contained."  If  it  was  otherwise,  so  that 
God  could  unite  with  a  devil,  and  that  every  person  who  par- 


28 

took  of  the  elements  partook  of  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  Sav- 
iour, all  those  would  remain  in  Christ  and  Christ  in  them— < 
John  6,  56 ;  and  all  so  called  christians  would  be  saints.  If 
this  mortal  body  partook  of  the  humanity  of  Jesus  (as  David 
says)  in  the  Eucharist,  the  first  enjoyment  would  make  that 
body  incorruptible  ;  and  if  it  partook  of  the  glorified  human- 
ity, it  would  make  the  same  like  his  glorified  body,  immortal, 
which  is  only  promised  to  those  at  the  resurrection  in  whom 
the  spirit  of  Jesus  dwelled.  If  the  soul  is  here  nourished  by 
the  spirituality  of  the  means,  it  must  be  a  soul  in  a  situation 
to  unite  with  God— a  humble,  contrite,  obedient,  believing 
soul :  with  such  a  soul,  Christ  can  indissolubly  unite  ;  and  she 
will  remain  in  him,  if  united  ;  she  will  increase  in  his  likeness, 
grow  in  grace,  increase  in  sanctification  :  and  such  a  soul  can- 
not die ;  she  lives  in  Christ,  and  Christ  in  her  Now  as  the 
soul  governs  the  body,  so  will  soul  and  body  show  that  they 
are  his,  and  prove  it  by  their  actions.  Whosoever,  then,  shows 
works  of  the  flesh.. ..adultery,  fornication,  uncleanness,  lasciv- 
iousness,  idolatry ,  witchcraft,  hatred^variance,  emulation,  wrath, 
strife,  seditions,  heresies,  envyings,  murders,  drunkenness,  rev- 
e//m§^....Gal.  v.  21,  22... .or  either  of  them,  his  soul  hath  nev- 
<er  spiritually  partaken  of  the  flesh  and  blood  of  Christ,  al- 
though he'  often  partook  of  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine  ; 
for  if  he  had,  he  could  not  act  thus.  If  any  M  say  he  hath  fel- 
lowship with  Christ,  and  walketh  in  (such)  darkness,  he  lieth, 
and  does  not  speak  the  truth" — I.  John,  1-6.  They  who  have 
partaken  of  the  spirit  of  Jesus,  and  live  in  him,  and  have  their 
bfing  in  him,  show  it  by  the  fruit  of  the  spirit — which  is  love, 
joy,  peace,  long-suffering,  gentleness,  goodness,  faith,  meekness, 
temperance — Gal,  v.  22,  23.  If  any  man  has  not  the  spirit  of 
Christ,  he  is  none  of  his — Rom.  8,  9. 

You  see  that  now  David  openly  supports  that  Roman  doc- 
trine which  he,  in  the  April  session,  (minutes,  page  11,)  says 
he  never  believed,  never  preached,  and  never  would  preach  ; 
for  on  this  doctrine,  which  he  now  and  before  supported,  the 
other  with  which  he  was  accused  is  inseparably  connected.  If 
he  is  like  Christ,  transformed  into  his  body,  he  can  forgive 
sins  ;  he  is  the  mediator  between  his  flock  arid  God  ;  he  hath 
a  right  to  sit  on  his  throne  ;  in  short,  he  is  the  Pope,  who  calls 
himself  the  vicegerent  of  Christ.  But  why  should  he  alone 
have  that  privilege  ?  Surely  every  person  who,  by  partaking 
of  consecrated  bread  and  wine,  and  thereby  making  himself 
equal  to  Christ  by  eating  and  drinking  his  body  and  blood,  is 
like  Christ,  and  can  do  all  which  David  H.  arrogates  to  him- 
self as  above,  for  Christ  remaineth  in  them.  Such  like  was 
proven  to  be  his  doctrine,  and  others  more  filthy,  (see  appen- 


m 

d\x  i)  but  we  covered  it  with  the  mantle  of  peace,  long-suffer^ 
ing,  gentleness.  Now  he  says,  Why  did  you  not  dismiss  me  ? 
and  instead  thereof,  give  me  a  certificate  of  a  good  character  and 
license  to  preach.  That  certificate  is  reviewed  above.  And  here 
our  goodness  and  love  are  deservedly  censured,  for  we  ought 
%o  have  dismissed  him  forever,  (see  appendix,)  andought  to  have 
attended  to  our  worthy  President,  when  he,  on  the  complaint  of 
his  deputies,  that  the  congregations  would  break  off  from  usf 
and  painting  other  consequences  with  high  colors,  answered, 

We  must  act  like  honest  men  the  consequences  are  with  God 7 

This  we  did  not  do,  out  of  compassion  ;  and  he  now  whips  us 
for  it.  But  xvhat  a  crooked  soul  must  such  a  being  have;  xvhat 
a  crookea ^Bishop  to  guide  the  flock  of  Christ  I 

Dear  Christians,  beware  how  you  are  influenced  by  such 
doctrine  as  you  are  ,told  in  his  book.  Satan  cannot  desire  a 
better  attorney  to  serve  his  cause,  than  when  you  are  lulled 
into  sleep  by  being  told,  that  when  you  are  baptized  and  you 
partake  of  the  sacrament,  your  heaven  is  sure  to  you.  Behold 
hundreds  who  do  it,  and  they  do  not  prove  by  their  works  that 
Christ  is  in  them  and  they  in  him.  Are  not  many  of  them 
reprobates  ? — II.  Cor.  13,  5;  and  show  by  their  actions  that 
they  are  avowed  disciples  of  Satan  ?  In  our  days,  to  hear 
such  doctrines,  ar\d  be  compelled  to  disprove  them,  is  enough 
to  create  abhorrence.  Those  who  hate  to  enter  heaven  by  way 
of  repentance  and  faith,  will,  however,  be  glad  to  hear  and 
take  up  with  such  an  easy  method  of  going  to  heaven.  Glad 
to  live  in  sin,  they  joyfully  embrace  the  priest  who  can  for- 
give their  most  heinous  crimesc  They  can  compel  Christ  to 
unite,  with  them— force  him  to  open  heaven's  gate,  and  con- 
strain him  to  make  saints  of  them.  What  was  it  that  Doctor 
Luther  rescued  us  from  ?  .  The  answer  is,  from  that  very  doc- 
trine which  is  the  main  pillar  on  which  the  Church  of  Rome 
reclines. ,. .viz :  the  Pope  and  all  his  underlings  can  forgive 
sins  ;  that  the  priest  was  a  creator,  and  could  create  the  body 
of  Christ  out  of  bread ;  and  as  that  body  contained  flesh  and 
blood,  the  common  people  were  debarred  from  the  wine,  as 
blood  enough  for  them  was  in  the  body ;  and  the  priest  drank 
the  wine,  which  he,  as  creator,  had  first  made  into  blood,  Lu- 
ther redeemed  the  church  of  God  from  such  superstition,  by 
which  millions  of  poor  souls  were  sent  to  hell,  and  had  been 
the  cause,  and  is  since,  that  millions  of  such  who  denied  the 
supremacy  of  the  priesthood  were  called  heretics,  and  became 
martyrs  ;  and  all  who  seek  salvation  through  Christ  without 
the  mediation  of  a  priest,  are  to  this  day  called  heretics,  anti- 
christs, and  all  improper  names,  by  those  of  the  same  trade,  qo 
matter  what  they  call  themselves? 


so 


All  explainers  of  the  Revelations  agree,  that  the  church  of 
Rome  is  the  whore,  or  false  church  ;  that  the  beast  is  the  mon- 
ster reigning  in  said  church,  and  by  whose  power  vital  and 
true  religion  is  suppressed.^  But  in  order  to  pervert  or  cir- 
cumvent his  readers,  David,  like  a  true  Jesuit,  wishes  to  make 
them  believe  that  a  union  of  our  church  in  America  is  the 
beast... .See  Libel,  pages  6  and  7, 13  and  14.  Ridiculous  rant. 
It  is  admitted,  of  course,  that  the  above  doctrine  is  not  inven- 
ted by  David,  as  he  says,  page  35,  but  by  the  church  and  Bish- 
ops of  Rome.  But  he  makes  use  of  good  Dr.  Luther  as  a 
catspaw  to  drag  him  out  of  the  mire,  and  cites  sundry  expres- 
sions of  his,  particularly  out  of  a  book  he  calls  Wittenburg, 
which,  perhaps,  no  man  has  eyer  seen,  (for  Wittenburg  is  a 
city  in  which  Luther  lived ;)  and  he  cites  words,  but  no  doubt 
omits  the  context,  as  it  would  explain  itself:  But  be  it  as  it 
■will,  and  admit  that  Luther,  in  his  battles  with  Bishops  and 
Calvin,  made  strong  expressions,  as  he  was  bitterly  attacked, 
does  any  man  of  sense  believe  that  he  forgot  what  our  Saviour 
says,  when  on  this  topic  of  his  flesh  and  blood,  John  vi.  63 : 
"  It  is  the  spirit  that  quickeneth,  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing  ; 
the  words  that  I  speak  unto  you  they  are  spirit,  and  they  are 
life."  Now  read  from  the  53d  verse  to  the  56th  of  the  same 
chapter,  can  you  believe  that  Dr.  Luther  hath  done  so,  and  not 
read  through  the  chapter?  Then  judge  for  yourself  who  is  a 
Lutheran,  or  who  is  honest.  David  extracts  authorities  out  of 
the  book  called  Luther,  as  far  as  they  suit  him,  and  leaves  out 
the  rest.  Does  he  not  also  do  this  with  Scripture  ?  And  will 
he,  of  course,  not  also  do  it  from  other  books  ?  But  you  may, 
perhaps,  say,  we  find  nothing  in  the  appendix  to  charge  David 
with  preaching  the  doctrine  of  the  Roman  church.  In  answer 
to  which,  I  beg  you  to  ask  your  consciences,  Have  not  many  of 
you  heard  him  say  what  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hall  relates  ?.... See  his 
letter.  Have  you  not  heard  him  preach,  that  whosoever  is 
baptized  and  partakes  of  the  Lord's  supper,  is  safe  ?  and  tha^ 
those  who  insist  upon  further  repentance  and  conversion,  are 
enthusiasts  and  bigots  ?  If  you  will  not  confess  this  to  your 
neighbors,  it  can  be  proven  abundantly.  Was  it  not  proven  to 
his  face,  in  the  April  session,  1819,  (and  which,  for  peace  sake, 
was  not  recorded  in  the  minutes,)  that  in  distress  of  soul,  on 
application  to  him  for  advice,  he  answered,  u  You  have  nothing 
to  do  but  to  hear  me  preach,  and  commune  With  me  in  the 
Lord's  Supper — the  rest  is  upon  me  to  do ;  make  yourself 

*  Bishops  (as  David  calls  himself)  have  arrogated  to  themselves  all  powers 
in  churches ;  and  although  the  name  originally  was  innocent,  yet  the  Lutheran 
church  in  America  never  made  use  of  it.  If  Philip  can  make  a  Bishop,  Paul 
mx&  Philip  will  soon  make  David  Archbishop  ! 


31 


quite  easy,v  &c.  Does  the  beast  not  show  his  horns  here  ? 
It  is  true  some  of  you  may  say,  that  this  witness  was  his  en- 
emy :  he  is  a  drunkard — he  ought  not  to  be  believed.  But 
why  had  he  him  excommunicated  only  a  few  weeks  before  the 
Session,  if  he  had  not  been  afraid  of  his  assertions  to  his  face  ? 
And  besides,  if  he  was  a  drunkard*  I  am  afraid  that  if  all  3uch 
are  discredited,  and  not  admitted  as  witnesses  when  ihey  are 
sober ,  creditable  witnesses  would  not  be  very  plenty,  and  se- 
lect councils  dwindle  down :  But  it  is  for  you  to  judge  whom 
you  will  believe.  It  is  believed  that  Henkel  denied  the  charge* 
But  see  appendix.  Is  this  not  a  most  infamous  Roman  doc- 
trine, to  tell  our  youth  before  confirmation,  and  while  they 
listen  to  him  as  their  religious  instructer,  not  to  intermarry 
with  Presbyterians  or  other  denominations,  as  if  they  were  no 
christians — all  heretics— and  making  such  expressions  as  are 
shameful  to  be  repeated,  but  sufficiently  certified— See  certifi- 
cates in  appendix :  And  then  to  cite  scripture,  where  it  says^ 
"  Be  ye  not  unequally  yoked  with  infidels 

It  is  not  necessary  to  say  any  thing  about  his  ordination  » 
enoagh  hath  been  said  to  impartial  readers  on  the  subject ; 
partial. ones  will  screen  themselves  as  he  does  under  Mr.  Bell's 
ease ;  but  it  does  not  ajpply,  as  the  latter  was  a  candidate,  and 
David  a  legal  but  very  improper  catechet.  And  his  baptizings 
and  confirmations  are  not  valid  in  our  church,  and  ought  to  be 
in  none.  And  there  is  a  doubt  whether  our  brethren  in  Christ, 
the  Presbyterians,  will  admit  Mr.  Bell's  ordination  as  sufficient* 

What  David  says  about  the  great  misdemeanor  of  Philip, 
his  brother,  (page  38,)  and  how  we  ought  to  have  acted  with 
him,  deserves  no  answer.  Every  person  present  there  knows 
that  we  did  all  we  could  to  heal  inflicted  wounds  ;  this  was 
our  aim  throughout,  at  Lincolnton.  But  I  ask  you,  could  you 
reasonably  expect  it  from  us  to  humble  to  such  a  being  as 
David,  and  then  unite  with  him,  and  remain  honest  men  ?  His 
derivation  of  the  validity  of  his  ordination,  is  to  make  a  blind 
to  children.  Were  the  Doctors,  Frank,  Telthusen,  Muhlen- 
berg, Kunz,  Smith,  and  Nussman,  Bishops  ?  Is  the  Rev.  Mr* 
Storke  a  Bishop,  and  Paul  and  Philip,  are  they  Bishops,  in  the 
acceptation  of  the  word  now  understood,  or  is  he  or  his  father 
Archbishops,  then  we  are  to  have  a  proper  Hierarchy  among 
us.    Doctor  Luther  was  no  Bishop  :  he  was  a  Priest. 

The  drift  of  David  appears  to  be  this,  (page  39,  and  note  a^f 
to  prevent  his  brother  (who,  in  hundred  instances,  hath  shown 
spiritual  life  in  embryo,  and  is  fond  of  peace  and  union)  to 
reunite  with  his  former  associates.  David  calls  him  to  ar* 
account,  by  virtue  of  his  Bishopical  authority,  for  a  compro- 
mise he  made,  as  printed  in  our  minutes  ;  and  it  is  Da^vid  alone 


who,  by  satanic  misrepresentation,  caused  him  again  to  retract 
Nothing  deserves  to  be  said  to  the  note,  page  40,  further  than 
that  it  shows  how  he  had  his  deputies  with  us  all  the  week  in 
Lincolnton ;  that  he  governed  them  ;  had  motions  made  ;  they 
voted  ;  they  debated  according  to  his  command.  He  states 
that  the  question  about  his  being  tried  was  not  suffered  to  be 
debated.  This  is  not  so — See  appendix.  Here  he  acted  by 
his  deputies,  as  a  member,  or  as  a  spy.  Look  at  the  effron- 
tery :  He,  the  Bishop,  keeps  deputies,  not  the  congregations ; 
he  commands  them  s  he  makes  Mr.  Aderhold  report  to  him— • 
{and  no  doubt  Aderhdld's  report  was  seen  by  him  only  when 
it  was  printed ;  if  not,  Aderhold  can  write  good  English  in 
Henkel's  style,  and  by  his  pen.)  Why  did  not  Mr.  John 
Abernathy  sign  that  report  to  him  ?  He  also  was  his  deputy. 
The  answer  is  plain :  He,  though  eccentric,  yet  an  honest,  well 
meaning  man,  departed  from  us  in  peace  and  friendship,  fully 
satisfied,  by  shaking  of  hands,  that  the  horrid  crime  of  disown- 
ing a  ratified  constitution  had  been  fully  atoned  for;  and  he 
would  not  act  like  a  devil,  and  repeat  and  throw  up  to  the  sin- 
ner what  he  had  condescended  to  pardon. 

The  pamphlet  of  David,  from  page  40  to  46,  contains  a  de- 
scription of  an  assembly  called  Lutheran  Synod.  It  appears 
thereby  that  Paul  and  Philip  were  ordained  ministers  ;  Zink, 
Miller,  and  Easterly,  candidates,  (perhaps.)  The  two  Henkels 
,act  as  a  Synod;  and  resolve,  with  their  19  deputies,  (who  had 
Jbut  two  votes  by  the  constitution,)  that  Zink  and  Miller  should 

be  ordained— Bishops  !  and  Easterly  a  Deacon  !  *....Fine 

play.  They  make  rules — 1st.  The  transactions  should  be  in 
German — the  reports  should  be  published  in  that  language  ; 
but  a  note  is  put  there,  to  show  how  the  English  may  also 
treep  in. — (This  is  now  printed  for  English  readers,  and  no 
doubt  is  added  by  David,  for  he  wants  support  from  them.) 
Pray  who  was  Secretary  there  ?  Philip  was  President,  by 
prescription — see  Trinity  farce,  1819;  Paul  is  a  member  of 
Pennsylvania  and  Ohio  Synods — see  art.  16.. ..no  doubt  Arch- 
bishop ;  he  is  not  Secretary  :  who  then  was  it,  according  to 
constitution  ?  I  think  David,  though  absent  ;  and  he  issued 
his  orders  from  Lincoln,  as  he  did  to  his  deputies  in  Lincoln - 
ton.  In  article  5,  only  see  what  elbow  room  they  allow  to 
themselves :  the  necessary  qualifications,  no  doubt,  are,  to  be 
loquacious.  The  3d  article  speaks  of  a  christian  life :  No 
doubt  the  meaning  is,  here,  that  he  should  go  to  the  commun- 
ion, and  not  marry  a  Presbyterian,  (for  any  other  vital  Chris- 
tianity is  bigotry,  as  above  stated,)  &c. — Appendix.  The  11th 
excludes  us  poor  N.  C  ministers,  except  we  convince  them 
that  we  believe  and  teach  that  visible  bread  can  be  created  into 


33 

the  visible  body  of  the  Saviour — (whether  in  his  humanity,  or 
humanity  glorified,  is  not  yet  determined.) 

It  is  useless  to  say  any  thing  further  to  what  the  Tennessee" 
Synod  has  done.  (The  little  satiric  vein  here  shown  must  be 
excused,  and  ascribed  to  G.  S.)  They  wish  to  be  called  the  Lu- 
theran Synod ;  and  four  of  them  (two  being  first  thereto  created) 
change  our  whole  constitution.  Surely,  the  minority  is  deter- 
mined to  coerce  the  majority. 

David,  page  46,  makes  another  blind  to  his  readers,  in  ad- 
dition to  his  Oration.  Here  his  own  case  comes  out ;  he 
thinks  that  if  the  General  Synod  excommunicates  him,  he  hath 
a  slender  opportunity  to  establish  parties  ;  but  if  no  General 
Synod  is  established,  then  he  can  have  an  opportunity,  if,  ia 
his  opinion,  he  is  treated  unjustly,  to  leave  one  Synod  and  at- 
tach himself  to  another,  and  there  be  whitewashed,  (except  for 
crimes  sufficiently  proven.)  In  his  German  pamphlet  we  find 
another  objection  :  he  hates,  that  when,  according  to  the  plan, 
(which  is  opposed  therein,)  he  entreats  to  uflite  with  another 
Synod,  that  it  must  be  with  consent,  and  that  he  must  produce 
a  good  character  in  a  certificate ;  this  he  abhors,  and  says  that 
the  evidence  of  his  ordination  is  sufficient.  Of  course,  when 
he  is  once  ordained,  he  may  afterwards  swear  false,  commit 
other  crimes,  become  infamous — and  yet  he  must  be  every 
where  admitted  as  a  Lutheran  minister.  But  he  may  here  be 
comforted  ;  for  the  general  constitution,  now  adopted,  gives 
no  authority  to  the  General  Synod  to  excommunicate,  nor  has 
it  any  clause  respecting  removals  of  ministers ;  of  course,  his 
full  power  of  establishing  parties  will  not  be  hindered  by  the 
General  Synod.  And  if  any  individual  Synod  should  adopt 
him  as  a  member,  with  the  charges  and  proof  here  exhibited, 
before  he  proves  to  be  a  reformed  man,  they  are  surely  wel- 
come to  him.  But  it  is  a  question  whether  any  serious  body 
will  say,  as  the  selected  council  in  Lincoln  did,  "  Because  we 
find  no  greater  fault  with  you  than  hitherto,"  (namely,  there 
exhibited) — or,  in  other  words,  because  you  did  not  increase 
in  horribility,  "  we  can  by  no  means  think  of  dismissing  you." 

From  page  46  to  65,  David  gives  us  a  long  sermon  on  the 
futile  doctrine  that  unbelievers,  as  well  as  believers,  receive 
the  body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour  in  the  supper  created  by 
him.  He  condescends,  at  first,  to  argue  as  a  sectarian  should, 
with  all  possible,  yet  civil,  arguments,  to  support  his  tenets. 
But  in  the  first  place,  his  attempts  to  convince  the  readers  that 
the  humanity  of  Christ  is  enjoyed,  are  so  far  fetched  that  com- 
mon sense  cannot  comprehend  them,  and  are  abhorring  to  the 
understanding,  (which  is  half  the  soul,  see  page  16.)  And 
2dly,  it  is  a  linseywoolsey  cloth,  calculated  to  make  people 

/  5 


ifeiieve  tliat  the  warp  is  of  good  materials;  and  on  reflection 
thereon,  to  prevent  the  filling  up  from  being  examined,  which, 
if  done,  notwithstanding,  will  be  found  to  consist  of  patches  of 
<old  worn-out  cloths,  fit  only  to  make  domestic  carpets  for  the 
kitchen.  He  has,  pages  32  and  33,  &c.  already  said,  what  is 
contained  in  the  long  and  many  repetitions  of  the  sermon  ;  and 
at  is  useless  to  take  up  the  reader's  time  to  refute  what  shines 
here  and  there  in  civil,  but  mostly  in  the  same  arrogaiit  style 
as-  the  first.  Whoever  will  take  time  to  read  it,  may i  he  will, 
if  able,  find  strange  conclusions,  and  answers  to  his  own  pro- 
positions ;  and  if  the  points  on  which  he  argues  were  not  too 
serious  to  be  treated  with  levity,  he  could  easily  be  detected 
as  a  false  reasoner,  perverting  the  clear  object  of  the  institu- 
tion and  the  words  of  the  Saviour,  especially  his  recital  of  John 
6'.  But  enough  hath  been  said  already  to  such  who  are  not 
satisfied  with  forms  to  confirm  them  in  the  certain  object  of 
the  spirituality,  and  not  sensuality,  of  the  holy  institution.  Let 
me  only  repeat  again,  that  if  all  who  partake  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  eat  and  drink  Jesus  bodily,  they  cannot  see  corruption, 
they  cannot  die — they  can  forgive  sins  ;  in  short,  they  are 
Gods — and  every  individual  body  of  them  is  like  Christ's- 
body,  (according  to  David,)  every  where  present  at  the  same 
anoment. 

To  such  who  gladly  embrace  such  doctrine,  by  which  the 
enjoyment  of  happiness  and  certainty  of  salvation  is  to  be  ob- 
tained by  visible  means,  (though  he  now  and  then,  in  his  ser- 
mon, qualified  them,  however  unintelligible,)  nothing  can  be 
said  in  addition  to  what  was  said  formerly.  Be  you,  however.^ 
warned  how  you  make  your  election  sure,  with  fear  and  trem- 
bling ;  for  your  saying,  Lord,  Lord, did  we  not  eat  with  thee? 
will  not  admit  you  to  his  visible  presence,  except  as  a  judge: 
but  if  his  spirit  and  your  spirit  have  been  united  here,  and  that 
you,  as  such,  received  the  sacrament  to  strengthen  your  faith, 
love,  and  adoring  inclination  to  him  who  bled  and  died  for 
you,  then  only  you  are  safe. 

The  conclusion  of  his  pamphlet,  to  his  Lutheran  brethren 
and  sisters,  which  is  another  farrago  of  twisted  nonsense  in 
connexion  with  the  Oration,  may  well,  for  diversion  sake,  be 
read.  The  General  Synod  is  again  wrapt  up  in  the  Revelation 
as  foretold.  He  compares  himself  to  Christ,  a  persecuted 
man  ;  tells  them  they  should  not  shun  the  cross  to  unite  with 
him.  Incomprehensible  it  surely  is,  that  where  Christ  dwells 
in  the  heart  of  a  believer,  that  a  Judas,  Herod,  Caiphas  and 
Pilate,  are  also  there.  But  it  becomes  him  to  say  jargon,  in 
order  to  be  believed  great.  He  adviseth  his  readers  by  no  | 
means  to  leave  his  communion  ;  for  if  they  did3  it  was  perjury  r 


35 


(it  se6ms  he  knows  what  that  is). ...he  calls  it  dreadful.  Surer 
ly  schism  is  a  great  crime  :  you  will  read  of  the  author  of  it  in. 
these  pages.  It  seems  he  had  occasion  most  humbly  to  beg  of 
those  who  left  him  and  his  unauthorised  ministry,  to  return 
to  him,  and  refresh  his  heart,  and  the  hearts  of  those  to  whom 
he  is  constrained  (not  willingly)  to  be  thankful  for  having 
maintained  his  reputation  and  family.  This  shows  why  the 
book  is  written  for,  viz  :  to  increase  disturbance,  and  make 
the  Lutherans  and  Reformed  to  remain  at  variance,  and  one 
brother  to  differ  with  his  neighbor.  , 

I  cannot  avoid  to  give  the  readers  some  extracts  from  the 
letters  of  his  father,  and  respectable  brother  Solomon,  to  show 
that  they  know  David,  that  they  and  I  were  in  constant  friend- 
ly correspondence,  and  that  they  approved  what  was  done. 
Of  Paul  Henkel,  Dec.  4, 1817— You  have  acted  wisely  with 
the  hand  imposers  at  your  last  Synod#  Whether  Philip  now 
changed  saddles  on  conviction,  so  as  to  ride  a  Pennsylvania 
horse  or  not,  it  matters  not,  so  that  he  rides  on  his  own  sad- 
dle. David,  (if  he  rides  his  own  horse  and  saddle,)  it  is  good, 
that  his  horse  dare  not  go  where  he  pleaseth,  but  is  guided  by 
another ;  he  might  otherwise  turn  it  to  Scotland,  and  try  to 
ford  the  seas,  and  both  be  drowned." 

>  Point  Pleasant,  Jan.  5,  1818. 

"  You  act  quite  right  to  cool  hotrheaded  David  as  much  as 
possible.  He  certainly  has  received  severe  reproof  from  me, 
and  in  such  a  manner  that  he  does  not  write  any  more  ;  but 
he  must  have  his  course  for  a  time.  paul  henkel.'* 

By  his  letters  of  Nov.  18,  1818,  and  March,  1819,  he  had 
knowledge  of  our  earlier  Synod,  and  writes  that  he  will  gladly 
be  there  if  he  possibly  can.  After  our  April  Synod,  I  repor- 
ted to  Paul  all  we  had  done  ;  and  he  writes,  May  26,  1819? 
<c  The  information  respecting  David  and  his  conduct,  it  i§  true? 
is  disagreeable  ;  but  the  remedy  applied  to  him  may  be  good- 
It  is  a  pity  that  he  misuses  his  talents ;  but  I  could  never 
bring  him  to  think  and  act  otherwise.  Respecting  Mr.  Bell 
and  Philip,  I  will  endeavor  my  best  to  make  peace." 
Extract  of  letters  from  Dr.  Solomon  Henkel,  after  my  report  to 
him  of  our  April  Session* 

u  May  17,  1819.  It  is  most  miserable,  that  David  canno^ 
come  to  right  again.  His  passions  are  too  stubborn  against 
his  soul.  That  you  have  reduced  him  in  office,  is  right,  if  it 
only  brings  him  to  more  humility ;  but  I  fear  his  pride  will 
not  admit  of  it.. ..but  the  church  better  have  fewer  ministers^ 
than  quarrelsome  heads." 
•  "  May  22,  1819.  Brother  Philip  wrote  to  my  father  res- 
pecting his  intention  tQ  hold  conference  $t  Trinity ;  but  my 


86 


father  wrote  him  such  a  letter,  that  he  will  hardly  do  it.5? 
"May  24.  That  David  humbled  himself  is  clever j  I  hope 
he  will  at  last  see  that  he  hath  flesh  and  blood.  You  have  done 
right.  Let  these  young  lords  know  that  they  shall  not  do  as 
they  please,  but  do  what  is  right.  My  mother  says  the  Synod 
did  a  father's  part  to  him :  now  she  believes  that  you  love  Da- 
vid, and  act  with  him  according  to  right."  Again...."  Philip's 
letter  is  of  the  10th  of  May.  He  will  hold  conference.  It 
is  likely  that  he  had  not  then  received  your  letter.  It  is  ag- 
gravating that  satan  hath  his  cloven  foot  also  among  ministers. 
My  father  does  not  sanction  it  at  all  that  Philip  proceeds  thus. 
These  are  the  gambols  of  children,  performed  by  these  lords. 
Why  did  they  not  contradict  the  early  conference  from  the  be- 
ginning ?  Why  don't  they  say  any  thing  till  now  ?  These  are 
no  men  in  their  office.  This  will  not  do,  O,  may  the  Lord 
help,  that  unity  may  be  restored.  solomon  henkel," 

This  shows  a  holy  zeal  of  an  honest  man.    This,  my  readers, 
is  principally  to  show  you  that  nothing  we  did  was  secreted 
from  his  father,  and  that  he  approved  then  what  was  right,  and 
disapproved  wrong  measures:  since  that,  the  father  is  gov- 
erned by  David  ;  but  I  hope  not  finally,  for  he  labored  many 
years  with  fidelity  in  the  vineyard  of  the  Lf>rd,  and  it  would 
be  a  pity  if  laurels  should  fade,    i  wrote  to  Solomon  from  Bal- 
timore $  and  he  answered,  that  his  father  and  mother  were 
since  three  weeks  on  their  journey  to  Tennessee,  and  he  wishes 
his  father  the  courage  of  a  lion,  to  conquer  the  young  hot- 
heads.   What  will  be  the  consequence  with  these  youngsters, 
as  I  see  by  letters  they  speak  of  suing,  in  order  to  subdue  us 
old  men.    That  is  terrible,  &c.    After  my  return  from  Balti- 
more, I  found  what  was  transacted  at  Trinity  by  Philip  and 
David,  and  communicated  the  same  to  the  above  honest  man, 
and  also  what  was  done  in  Baltimore.    He  acknowledged  the 
receipt,  and  is  sorry  for  the  perturbation  occasioned  (as  he 
says)  by  the  boys.    "  Don't,  by  no  means,  excuse  yourself  res- 
pecting my  natural  brothers  ;  in  spirit  they  are,  as  I  view  them, 
strangers,  in  the  highest  degree."    This  gentleman  was  at  first 
warm  for  the  union*  but  his  father  always  against  it,  and  he 
gave  me  his  reasons,  in  civility,  from  the  beginning.    After  a 
while,  Solomon  was  also  of  a  different  opinion  :  but  this  should 
never  break  friendship;  variance  in  opinion  brings  things  to  a 
proper  investigation.     But  if  parties  enforce  their  opinions 
with  such  despotic,  scurrilous,  and  malicious  grins  as  David 
does,  farewell.    I  am  sorry,  however,  that  I  must  here  extract 
from  a  publication  in  the  Star,  May  19,  1820,  and  which  is  not 
contradicted,  that  old  Mr.  Henkel  could  be  turned  from  hif 
former  opinion.    It  is  there  said?  that  "  The  facner  of  David 


came  to  Lincoln  in  Qctoher,  1819  ;  and  on  visiting  the  several 
churches,  after  divine  service,  addressed  the  audience  as  fol- 
lows: 'That  he  had  made  particular  inquiry  respecting  the 
charges  ^against  his  son  David,  and  was,  very  glad  to  find  that 
^hey  were  groundless  as  false'., ..when  and  where  his  son  Da- 
vid, myself,  and  several  of  the  jury  who  tried  and  found  him. 
guilty,  were  actually  present,  and  all  knew  that  his  assertions 
were  not  true.  And  thus,  instead  of  admonishing  his  son,  and 
endeavoring  to  bring  him  to  an  early  repentance,  aided  him 
with  another  untruth,  (that  is,  if  he  alluded  to  the  above  char- 
ges,) in  order  to  persuade  the  ignorant  that  even  that  which 
was  proven  against  his  son,  and  acknowledged  by  himself  in 
presence  of  the  Syriod^  was  not  true." 

I  had  forgotten  this  acknowledgment  when  I  wrote  the 
above  pages,  and  that  he  publicly  asked  Mr.  Hoyle's  pardon? 
until  I  read  the  whole  publication  again  in  the  Star.  It  is  an- 
other proof  that  he  admitted  trie  validity  of  the  Synod,  and 
that  we  separated  in  peace,  without  a  distant  suspicion  that  he 
would  send  a  messenger  to  his  brother  Philip,  to  make  him 
rush  in,  like  a  horse  to  battle,  as  if  the  greatest  injustice  had 
been  done  him;  or  that  he  would  take  such  infamous  turns, 
first,  to  compromise  openly  with  Mr.  Hoyle,  only  in  order  tcr 
silence  him,  and  then  immediately  to  set  ail  machinery  against 
him.  But  the  old  man  surely  has  no  kind  of  excuse  for  act- 
ing as  he  did.  He  knew  of  the  meeting  of  our  Synod  ;  prom- 
ised to  be  there,  and  always,  till  lately,  acknowledged  himself 
a  member  of  that  Synod,  £Iow  I  ask  any  candid  man,  whe- 
ther he  was  not,  as  a  member  of  our  Synod,  in  duty  bound  to 
be  supporting  what  we  had  done,  as  his  absence  was  not  our 
fault  ?  Or  whether  an  honest  man,  a  judge  of  appeal,  or  Arch- 
bishop, would  not  first  have  called  us  before  his  honor  to  show 
our  proof?  Who  gave  him  authority  to  overthrow  what  was 
deliberately  done  in  open  congregation  against  his  son  ?  What 
kind  of  spirit  does  this  show?  A  Pope,  at  best.  Paul  was 
the  first  in  Lincoln  who,  after  Mr.  Storke's  offer  of  reconcilia- 
tion, said,  4 1  cannot  unite  with  such  a  body.5* 

If  paper  enough  had  not  already  been  soiled  with  that  affair, 
it  would  be  well  to  insert  the  whole  publication  of  Mr.  Hoyle, 
as  it  would  serve  as  an  index  to  the  appendix,  with  one  re- 
markably dirty  action,  David's  giving  a  man  a  certificate  how 
he  acted  before  he  himself  was  in  embryo.  But  I  suppose 
those  who  have  that  publication  will  now  compare  it  with  the 
proof;  and  those  who  have  it  not,  may  form  their  own  judg- 
ment, as  far  as  the  proof  goes. 

*  And  the  reason  he  gave  Was  this,  the  majority  would  vote  for  a  union,  and 
that  we  believed  Mr.  Hoyle'e  publication.  And  who  should  not^  P  But  he  dijj( 
not  know  that  we  did. 


88 


The  Supplement  which  you  published  is  not  printed  to 
bound  up  with  your  pamphlet,  but  to  be  circulated  separately. 
The  drift  is  easily  discerned  :  you  expect  that  your  unwary 
txnd  ignorant  readers,  upon  whom  you  will  force  supplement 
and  pamphlet,  will  not  be  able  to  understand  any  thing  of  the 
"  rushing  sound  of  the  chariot  of  paternal  Deity,"  and  what 
the  "rising  in  his  meridian  glory1*  means— (see  page  15 ;)  and 
that  they  will  call  it  a  production  of  such  wisdom  as  cannot  be 
comprehended,  and  they  will  therefore  lay  it  aside  with  awe* 
Trjat  the  sensible  part  of  your  party  readers  will  not  wade 
through  it,  but  at  once  admit  that  it  is  unanswerable,  and  writ- 
ten by  inspiration,  (this  I  also  admit,  in  one  sense,)  and  that 
the  converts  you  intend  to  make  thereby  will  worship  the  idol 
upon  the  ventriloquism  uttered  by  the  same,  in  detached  parts. 
It  is  for  this  reason  that  you  have  printed  a  separate  sheet, 
long  enough  to  be  read  and  admired  after  a  sermon  on  Anti- 
christ, or  colors  of  rainbow,  to  very  patient  bystanders  ;  or  to 
avoid  travelling  over  land  and  water  to  make  proselytes,  you 
will  disperse  it — see  Matt.  23,  15.  You  take  this  method,  in 
the  first  place,  to  create  enmky  against  the  ministry,  whose 
congregations  hitherto  lived  in  peace  and  union  with  them, 
pitied  your  arrogant  conduct,  and  would  not  listen  to  lengthy, 
{sophisticated  arguments  to  prove  that  the  April  Synod,  which 
you  assisted  in,  was  acting  wrong.  2dly.  To  make  people 
believe  that  the  Rev.  Mr.  Storke  was  heterodox,  when  one  hun- 
idred  bibles  would  not  convince  him  that  the  manhood  of  Christ 
was  taken  into  the  Godhead,  and  that  therefore  Christ  ob- 
tained all  divine  perfection. 

N.  B.  I  do  not  know  whether  Mr,  Storke  said  so  ;  and  it 
is  well  you  do  not  say  it  on  your  incredible  authority,  but 
rest  on  others,  persuaded  by  you  to  sign  it.  I  have  not 
seen  the  word  manhood  in  the  bible,  (which  signifies  mar- 
riageable ;)  the  German  word  is  maunheit,  manbarkeit. 
You  know  what  ideas  are  attachable  to  this  expression. 
And  that  Christ  could  not  be  a  complete  second  person 
in  the  Trinity  before  his  manhood  was  taken  up  into  thp. 
Godhead^  I  myself  could  not  believe,  if  one  hundred  bibles 
said  so.  But  no  bible  says  so.  Humanity,  the  Son  of 
Man,  Human  Nature,  exalted  and  glorified  on  the  throne 
of  his  father,  conveys  different  ideas  than  the  word  man- 
hood* 

It  is  not  edifying  to  enter  deeper  into  an  unprofitable  inves- 
tigation of  this  subject;  and  I  do  not  write  theological  trea- 
tises. The  adorable  divinity  of  the  Saviour5  prior  to  his  in- 
carnation and  glorified  and  exalted  humanity,  creates  too  much 
awe  to  treat  it  lightly ;  and  I  would  think  myself  little  short 


n 

blaspheming  him  if  I  said,  as .  you  had  your  paper  reatlj 
(according  to  your  awn  account,)  "  that  because  (therefore) 
the  manhood  of  Christ  was  taken  up  into  the  Godhead,  he  had 
obtained  all  divine  perfection"* — for  this  is  the  true  sense  of 
your  quibble.  This  1  have  reason  to  believe,  that  in  heaven 
there  is  neither  manhood  nor  womanhood,  by  what  our  Sav- 
iour says  to  the  Sadduceans,  Matt.  22-30. 

The  above  are  my  words  in  the  nature  of  a  review ;  but  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Storke  says  that  the  discourse  happened  travelling 
along  the  road,  and  the  question  was  not  about  the  manhood 
of  Christ  being  taken  up  into  heaven,  but  it  was  about  the 
omnipresence  of  the  body  of  Christ ;  and,  as  I  took  it  to  be 
David  HenkePs  opinion,  that  the  bodily  presence  was  essential 
every  where.  He  says  that  his  expression  of  one  hundred 
bibles,  (if  it  was  so,)  was  a  hasty,  unguarded  and  hyperbolical 
one  ;  that  he  would  not  have  made  use  of  it  if  at  the  time  he 
had  had  the  least  suspicion  that  notice  would  be  taker}  of  it» 
It  was  in  a  friendly  conversation,  for  the  idea  was  so  absurd 
that  a  body  could  be  every  where  present,  that  the  expression 
was  hastily  made.  Henkel's  insinuation  is  intended  to  make 
people  believe  as  if  Mr.  Storke  discredited  the  bible,  or  de- 
nied the' human  nature  of  Christ  being  in  union  with  the  di- 
ving nature.  But  thousands  of  his  hearers  will  testify,  that 
such  insinuations  are  infamous  slander  ;  and  hundreds  wilt 
now  testify  in  heaven,  that  he  led  them  to  their  mediator  with 
this  all-important  doctrine. 

But  such  is  your  crafty  way  to  make  people  believe  that: 
We  (particularly  Mr.  S.torke)  do  not  teach  right ;  and  this  only 
in  order  to  lead  them,  if  possible,  to  believe  that  the  body  of 
Christ  is  every  where  in  immensity  of  space  at  the  same  mo- 
ment ;  where,  I  am  afraid,  the  half  of  your  soul  (understand- 
ing) will  never  find  him  in  your  airy  flights ;  nor  will  your 
whole  soul  united,  will  and  all,  ever  unite  with  a  glorified 
body,  if  not  soon  converted— and  of  course  you  will  not  see 
him,  when  your  millenium  is  ushered  in  by  ten  thousand  myri- 
ads ef  bright  Urim — (see  bombastic  oration,  page  15.)  But 
only  at  the  conflagration  of  this  system,  you  will  behold  him 
as  your  judge,  for  creating  and  continuing  disturbance,  and 
persisting  in  leading  souls  to  destruction.  I  see  Jesus  after 
his  resurrection,  not  at  the  grave,  Emmaus,  and  with  his  other 
disciples  at  the  same  moment. 

In  the  third  place,  you  wish  to  show  to  your  deluded  flock 
that  you  had  authority  over  us  and  the  doctrine  we  preach ; 
and  you  copy  from  our  minutes,  page  12-16,  like  an  angry 

*  Was  he  not  God  with  the  Father  and  Holy  Ghost  before  >' 


40 


child,  "What  we  there  said  against  you.  Poor  thing!  Pride 
was  the  cause  of  Lucifer's  fall.  I  have  the  confidence  that 
the  sensible  part  of  your  readers,  although  you  may  have  made 
them  enemies  to  the  doctrine  of  regeneration  and  persever- 
ance in  faith,  in  addition  to  baptism  and  communion,  as 
preached  by  us,  will  be  ashamed  of  your  uncivil  arrogance, 
as  it  shows  that  their  preacher  has  had  no  kind  of  genteel  ed- 
ucation, and  possesseth  only  vulgar  haughtiness*  Christ,  and 
him  crucified,  is  our  doctrine,  but  not  yours  ;  and  therefore 
you  cannot  be  answerable  for  us. 

In  your  fourth  partition,  you  again  try  to  throw  dust  in  the 
eyes  of  your  readers.  You  very  hypocritically  announce  to 
those  of  your  flock  who  are  for  peace,  that  you  are  willing  to 
live  in  peace  with  us.. ...and  you  propose  conditions*  If  you 
have  the  sense  of  a  human  being,  you  must  know  that  your 
conditions  are  beneath  notice.  What !  first  in  bombastic,  au- 
thoritative style,  to  call  us  perjured,  the  whore  of  Rome,  Popes, 
Antichrists,  a  General  Synod  ua  plant  germinated  in  hell,"  &c* 
and  then,  Nero  like,  in  the  same  breath  and  pamphlet,  com- 
mand us  how  we  shall  act,  before  we  can  be  contaminated  and 
disgraced  with  you.  This  beats  all !  and  is  the  superlative  of 
haughty  meanness*  You  better  continue  to  wallow  in  your 
own  puddle,  until  you  are  choked,  or  washed/  I  think  that 
friends  and  enemies,  if  you  have  made  any,  should  they  read  it, 
or  hear  it  read  by  you,  will  frown  at  your  mean  presumption. 

Your  fifth  address  deserves  no  notice  ;  for  your  committee 
business  hath  been  sufficiently  elucidated  above,  by  their  own 
certificate.  Your  seventy-odd  councillors,  meeting  in  detached 
parties,  at  sundry  times,  if  they  all  examined  and  signed  their 
investigation,  had  much  trouble  to  prop  the  committee's  insig- 
nificant certificate.  I  wish  you  had  given  us  the  history  of  the 
defence  you  made  before  the  committee,  where  neither  accu- 
ser nor  his  proof  was  admitted.  How  can  you  have  the  ef- 
frontery to  publish  such  jargon?  I  know  very  few  of  these 
men  who  signed  the  papers  :  the  neighbors  will  guess  or  know 
whether  they  acted  from  conviction,  by  persuasion,  enmity, 
pity,  or  good  sense.  That  a  committee  and  your  church  coun- 
cils had  good  sense  when  they  advised  you  not  to  bring  suit 
against  Mr.  Hoyle,  is  evident ;  and  although  you  are  not  ac- 
customed to  follow  advice,  here  you  did  it  because  it  was  your 
interest.  Let  the  readers  judge  by  the  appendix.  Why  ? 
Your  hypocritical  cloak  that  you  did  not  see,  because  you  are 
meek  and  humble,  will,  by  the  readers  of  your  virulent  pam- 
phlet, be  judged  to  be  a  notorious  falsehood. 

Go  on* Bishop  Henkel !  Call  those  members  (as  you  do  in 
ycmr  supplement)  to  strict  account,  why  they  do  absent  them- 


4i 


selves  from  your  meeting ;  why  they  will  not  commune  with 
you,  nor  forgive  you  before  you  ask  pardon;  let  them  feel 
your  power;  excommunicate  them;  drive  them  oat  frotn  in- 
fected atmosphere,  that  they  may  unite  with  such  who  preach 
Christ,  and  him  crucified,  and  who  will,  with  Paul,  know  noth- 
ing else,  and  whom  you  prohibit  from  preaching  that  doctrine. 

David,  1  am  done  with  reviewing  your  pamphlet,  conclusion 
and  supplement,  For  your  sake,  I  would  not  have  spoiled 
the  paper,  or  lost  a  minute  of  my  existence  in  exposing  your 
horribiiity,  for  I  candidly  think  you  are  past  recovery.  What 
I  wrote,  I  did  to  show  to  the  members  of  our  church  that  you 
was  not  wronged  by  the  ministry,  and  that  your  conduct  to- 
wards us  is  nothing  but  rebellion  against  love  and  union. 
That  your  puerile  declamation  against  the  April  Synod,  and 
against  the  General  Synod,  proceeded  only  from  malice,  now 
let  honest  readers  decide.  Suppose,  for  a  moment,  that  our 
April  Synod  was  entirely  wrong:  pray  what  harm  hath  it 
done  ?  Answer :  it  censured  you,  and  sent  a  deputy  to  Balti- 
more. Here  are  all  the  wrongs  included. .•••the  gnats  which 
you  cannot  swallow  ;  and  these  are  the  things  on  which  you 
write  a  pamphlet  of  sixty- odd  pages. 

The  greatest  enemies  that  may  be  raised  against  us  by  your 
exertions,  if,  in  their  cool  moments,  they  read  this  review  and 
appendix,  will  be  ashamed  of  the  error  you  pompously  led 
them  into,  and  will  own  that  no  honest  set  of  men,  with  such 
proof  before  them,  could  have  acted  with  more  lenient  justice. 

I  do  sincerely  wish  that  another  spirit  than  the  one  which 
inspired  you  to  write  twisted  nonsense,  would  open  your  eyes, 
to  show  you  that  you  are  standing  on  the  brink  of  a  gulph,  and 
that  the  holy  spirit,  with  whom  you  say  you  are  sealed  in  bap- 
tism, may  return  to  you,  show  you  your  depravity,  the  enor- 
mity of  your  acting  as  a  leader  of  souls  without  authority  or 
sign  of  grace,  and  make  you  so  ashamed  of  yourself  as  to  hide 
your  face  from  man,  until  you,  by  tears  of  repentance,  hum- 
bled yourself  before  Jesus,  whom  you  have  betrayed ;  and 
then  not  rest  until  you  receive  the  assurance  of  his  forgiveness, 
and  the  spirit  witnessed  unto  your  spirit  that  you  are  a  child 
of  God.  Then  will  you  understand  what  regeneration  is  ;  then 
you  will  know  what  it  is  to  love  God  and  your  neighbor ;  then 
you  will  pronounce  yourself  openly,  and  in  the  pulpit  too,  that 
you  are  a  poor  sinner,  and  have  no  power  to  forgive  sins  ;  then 
you  will  walk  humbly  before  God,  have  patience  with  the  faults 
of  your  brethren,  and  lead  an  exemplary  life.  Your  preach- 
ing will  then  be  influenced  by  the  spirit,  and  not  the  letter  of 
the  word  of  God  only ;  your  soul  will  then  enjoy  communion 
with  God ;  you  will  find  that  in  the  Eucharist  the  heart,  and 

6 


42 


xiot  the  body,  will  enjoy  what  the  Lord  made  it ;  foolish  que&* 
tions  you  will  avoid  knowing  that  they  do  gender  strife — II. 
Tim.  2,  23;  you  will  avoid  them*  and  contentions,  for  they 
are  unprofitable  and  vain— Tit.  3,  9.  Then  there  will  be  no 
obstacle  in  the  way  to  unite  with  all  true  lovers  of  the  Saviour, 
and  you  will  forget  railing  against  them,  if  your  expressions 
and  theirs  of  the  same  thing  differ  only  in  sound. 

Perhaps  I  owe  an  apology  to  the  patient  readers  for  having 
dragged  them  through  a  mire  with  some  force ;  and  I  am 
most  willing  to  do  so. 

Before  and  at  our  last  Synod  at  Lincolnton,  we  were  threat- 
ened to  be  sued,  and  to  be  exposed  in  print ;  and  on  the  ques- 
tion being  stated,  whether  we  should  first  officially  expose 
the  conduct  of  our  opponents  in  print,  it  was  decided  in 
the  negative,  in  order  not  to  increase  the  flame ;  but  it  was 
also  determined,  that  if  any  thing  appeared  in  print  against  us^ 
nothing  should  be  answered  officially  except  three  ministers 
approved  of  the  answer,  but  that  every  individual  might  an- 
swer in  the  same  manner  as  be  is  attacked — see  minutes,  page 
12.  But  when  the  minutes  were  preparing  for  the  press,  it 
ivas  found  that  without  a  concise  relation  of  the  Monday  trans- 
action of  that  Synod,  many  things  would  appear  quite  unintel- 
ligible....viz  :  the  reunion  of  Mr.  Bell,  the  motion  to  readmit 
David,  Mr.  Hill's  letter,  and  invitation  to  Philip  Henkel,  &c. 
This  was  stated  to  Mr.  Bell,  R.  J.  Miller^  Storke,  Sherer,  and 
others ;  and  all  saw  the  necessity.  A  few,  however,  would 
rather  have  no  minutes  printed,  and  I  was  one  of  them  ;  but 
printing  the  minutes  could  not  be  avoided,  as  it  is  a  standing 
rule  that  they  should  be  printed  ;  a  majority,  therefore,  agreed 
that  to  insert  the  Monday's  transactions  was  necessary.  This 
caused  to  appear  what  is  related  in  our  minutes  ;  and  all  those 
that  were  present  will  say  that  nothing  but  the  truth  is  there 
stated,  only  too  short.  But  when  now  David  comes  out  with 
renewed  poison,  in  order  to  make  himself  of  great  importance, 
and  coupling  himself  to  his  brother  and  father,  it  was  neces- 
sary to  meet  it  for  the  readers'  sake,  and  that  the  antidote 
should  be  ready  as  soon  as  the  poison  was  delivered  to  be 
swallowed,  or  soon  after.  This  left  very  little  time  to  the 
author  to  have  the  review  strictly  examined  by  three  preachers. 
The  rough  was,  however,  communicated  to  three  preachers 
and  others,  at  the  Synod,  June,  1821,  and  by  them  it  was  not 
disapproved,  although  the  language  in  part  is  sharp.  The 
points,  then,  relating  to  the  General  Synod,  our  Synod,  and 
the  conduct  of  the  same  to  David,  together  with  the  appendix, 
is  published  with  their  sanction.  The  language  is  my  own  ; 
&nd  if  it  cuts,  it  is  my  razor,  for  I  am  principally  ai*ned  at. 


ft 


and  have  a  right  to  answer  in  the  same  manner  as  attacked* 
See  our  minutes.  That  his  attack  is  in  any  manner  polite  or 
civil  towards  old  age,  none  of  the  readers  will  assert ;  and  that 
it  is  all  clothed  in  hypocritical  garments,  all  will  own.  Hypo- 
crites and  pharisees  always  were,  and  are,  the  bane  of  the 
church  of  God.  This  was  the  case  in  our  Saviour's  time,  and 
he  gave  them  severe  lessons,  according  to  Matt.  23  ;  verse  24, 
he  says,  "  Ye  blind  guides,  which  strain  at  a  gnat  and  swallow 
a  camel" — (see  constitutional  jargon,  and  appendix,  his  oath  f) 
verse  26,  "  Thou  blind  pharisee,  cleanse  first  that  which  is 
within  the  cup  and  platter,  that  the  outside  of  them  may  be 
clean  also verse  28,  "  Even  so,  ye  outwardly  appear  righteous, 
unto  men,  but  within  ye  are  full  of  hypocrisy  and  iniquity  ;** 
verse  23,  u  Ye  serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers,"  &c. 

If  you  see  the  name  of  Jesus  and  his  holy  means,  through- 
out HenkePs  pamphlet,  intermixed  with  malice  and  perver- 
sions of  truth,  how  he  threateneth  those  in  his  conclusion,  page 
65,  who  should  fall  off  from  him,  with  committing  perjury,  and 
punishment,  and  then  remaining  their  humble  brother  ;  how 
he  labors  to  convince  his  readers  by  inapplicable  stuff ;  how 
they  one  day  unite  with  Christ,  and  that  the  next  day  the  devil 
takes  them  off,  especially  from  page  47  to  64 ;  how  he,  to- 
wards the  end,  perverts  the  text,  John  6,  63,  only  to  support 
his  Roman  doctrine,  as  if  the  Saviour  only  spoke  of  the  spirit- 
uality of  his  flesh,  and  not  of  his  blood :  you  will  own  that  he 
must  be  a  hypocrite,  and  deserves  no  lenient  measures,  lest  he 
should  lead  into  error,  if  possible,  the  elect. 

The  Lord  says,  Jer.  xxin.  1,  2,  u  Woe  be  unto  the  pastors 
that  destroy  and  scatter  the  sheep  of  my  pasture  :  I  will  visit 
upon  you  the  evil  of  your  doings."  Show  me,  my  friends,  one 
sentence  in  his  whole  pamphlet  calling  upon  sinners  to  prayer 
and  repentance.  I  remember  none  ;  and  I  cannot  read  it  a 
second  time.  I  pray  you  to  read  the  33d  chapter  of  Ezekiel, 
to  the  20th  verse,  and  apply  it  as  your  conscience  dictates. 
You  will  there  find,  that  if  your  water  baptism  and  visible 
communion,  or  any  thing  else,  is  your  righteousness,  you  are 
lost.  Therefore,  believe  those  watchmen  who  warn  you  of 
the  approach  of  such  an  enemy  ;  believe  those  that  tell  you 
that  repentance  and  faith,  spiritual  regeneration,  not  water 
regeneration  alone,  walking  humbly  before  God,  continuing  in 
prayer,  increasing  in  conviction  of  your  nothingness,  growing 
in  grace,  humility  and  sanctification,  and  showing  your  Chris- 
tianity by  your  works,  is  the  only  ladder  to  heaven. 

I  entreat  my  readers  to  understand,  that  I  have  no  personal 
enmity,  against  D.  H.  but  that  I  abhor  his  official  conduct ;  an$ 


4*4* 


from  this  view,  you  will  judge  whether  my  zeal  is  justifiable, 
or  whether  I  was  too  severe. 

The  learned  and  critical  readers  will  be  kind  enough  to  ex- 
cuse many  errors,  wrong  expressions,  and  a  nice,  strict  review 
of  the  pamphlet,  as  I  think  all  time  lost  that  would  be  taken  up 
in  polishing  a  review,  and  examining  with  a  microscope  a 
mudpuddle. 


ADDITION. 

I  am  sorry  to  be  compelled  to  say  a  few  words  to  the  Ger- 
man readers,  by  a  pamphlet  1  have,  this  27th  day  of  June,  seen 
in  that  language,  printed  in  Newmarket,  in  Solomon  Henkel's 
printing  office. 

You  will  first  observe,  that  the  pamphlet  is,  like  one  already 
mentioned,  signed  by  no  person  as  author.  In  one  place> 
Ambrosius  Henkel,  the  printer,  signs  his  name ;  but  it  is  only 
to  a  criticism  of  the  plan  for  a  union,  and  which,  of  course, 
requires  no  answer,  as  it  is  sufficiently  hereinbefore  exposed 
as  poison.  In  the  second  place,  many  of  your  ministers  are 
attacked  without  mentioning  their  names,  in  order  that  you 
ma:'  i\  held  in  suspense  respecting  the  person  intended.  This, 
and  M  not  signing  his  name,  and  not  openly  naming  his  au- 
thority, proves  that  his  design  is  to  murder  or  assassinate  the 
characters  of  such  he  dare  not  openly  attack. 

As  all  books  and  pamphlets,  letters  or  advertisements  that 
have  no  visible  author,  are,  in  their  nature,  nothing  but  slan- 
derous libels,  punishable  by  law,  you  will  understand  why  I 
do  not  screen  myself  under  a  cloak  of  politeness  to  expose  the 
invisible  assassin,  as  I  have  no  human  name  before  me  to  ad- 
dress. I  shall  therefore  show  that  the  author  is,  by  uttering 
falsehoods,  a  disturber  of  peace  and  harmony. 

He  first  gives  us  the  history  of  a  conclave  called  the  Ten- 
nessee Synod,  as  already  noticed  in  David's  libel.  The  Ger- 
man libel,  sect.  13,  says  that  none  of  their  club  shallhave  seat 
and  vote  in  the  Synod  of  N.  C.  because  they  do  not  look  upon 
them  a  true  Lutheran  Synod.  David  says,  sect.  11,  where  he 
records  the  same,  that  they  will  have  no  seat  and  vote,  until 
they  are  convinced  that  we  are  united  with  them  in  the  Evan- 
gelical doctrine  of  the  Lutheran  church,  and  renounce  union. 

It  seems,  then,  that  their  records  do  not  agree  the  one  is 

fabricated  in  Lincoln,  the  other  in  Newmarket.  The  sections^ 
likewise,  do  not  agree  in  their  constitution. 


Page  12,  the  author  begins  addressing  his  dear  readers,  and 
that  in  such  polished  language  as  was  spoken  400  years  ago, 
and  first  relates  what  hurts  no  person.  But,  page  14,  it  is 
evident  that  the  author  protrudes  Paul  Henkel  as  a  most  in- 
dustrious champion  as  a  preacher;  but  he  forgets  many  lively 
anecdotes  about  money  and  land  matters,  wh  ch  Paul  received 
in  North-Carolina.  He  only  says  he  received  some  support 
from  Pennsylvania.  It  is  evident,  page  15,  that  the  same 
champion  is  insinuated  to  be  the  creator  of  the  Ohio  Synod, 
and  now  also  ol  Tennessee.  However,  Ohio  w  as  not  obedient 
to  him  in  1819,  for  they  then  adopted  the  union,  plan,  as  he 
says,  and  we  knew.  But  in  1820,  after  the  German  pamphlet 
had  been  published,  which  is  taken  notice  of  in  the  first  part 
of  this  review,  they  were  staggered,  and  recoiled  ;  they  were 
scared  at  a  phantom.  Page  15,  the  author  begins  to  give  rea- 
sons why  the  Tennessee  Synod  was  formed.  1'he  last  part  of 
page  16  is  a  perversion  of  facts :  we  had  no  constitution  that 
we  should  meet  at  Trinity,.!  819.  This  is  sufficiently  explain- 
ed above.  That  the  ministers  in  Tennessee  had  no  timely 
notice  of  our  earlier  meeting,  refutes  itself,  as  Philip  Henkel 
had  written  to  me  at  that  Synod,  and  to  others,  that  he  would 
not  come  ;  and  the  silly  author  acknowledged  that  himself,  p. 
21 — (he  forgets,  poor  thing,  that  he  had  denied  it). ...see,  also, 
appendix,  and  extracts  of  Paul's  and  other  letters.)  Page  17, 
in.  the  author- says,  a  man  who  holds  with  the  Pre^  Tterians 
complained  against  David.  Now  why  not  mention  Andrew 
Hoyl,  Esq.  Here  every  person  knows  whom  he  means :  but 
he  wishes  to  slander  us  to  his  foreign  readers,  because  we,  like 
honest  men,  attended  to  the  complaint  of  a  Presbyterian  ;  and. 
then  also  to  slander  Mr.  Hoyl,  by  saying  that  he  had  told  Da- 
vid before  Synod,  and  before  xvitnesses^  that  he  would  not  ap- 
pear against  him ;  and  that  thereby  David  was  made  secure, 
and  came  unprepared  with  proof.  From  the  respectable  char- 
acter of  Mr.  Hoyl,  and  his  conduct  at  Synod,  Tbelieve  it  to  be 
a  lie.  The  whole  statement  there  is  not  true  :  they  did  not 
make  up  and  shake  hands  before  the  charges  were  found  true 
and  after  an  apparent  compromise,  David  immediately  tried 
to  irritate  him  again.  What  the  author  says,  p.  18,  respecting 
David's  being  catechet,  happens  to  be  true.  What  he  says 
next,  that  we  are  much  inclined  to  the  doctrine  of  predestina- 
tion, is  an  abortion.  I  do  not  think  that  the  author  of  the 
pamphlet  is  predestined  to  be  a  vessel  of  honor.  That  we 
acted  partially,  as  the  note  to  page  18  says,  the  readers  will 
judge  of  by  the  appendix.  He  also  comes  and  gives  you  a 
copy  of  David's  license,  to  prove  that  we  had  confidence  in 
him.    This  is  sufficiently  explained  already.    He  says,  page 


46 


£0,  that  a  Synod  has  no  right  to  annul  a  decision  wrongfully 
pronounced  by  the  church  council  against  an  individual.  I 
ask  you,  where  can  an  individual  find  redress,  if  a  minister  with 
his  chosen  men  oppresseth  one  of  you,  except  in  Synod  ?  Page 
18,  he  asserts  an  absolute  untruth,  that,  in  181T,  it  was  resoU 
ved  that  David  should  be  ordained  in  1819.  This  is  only  ad- 
vanced to  repeat  the  lies  that  were  propagated  in  Lincoln, 
from  an  error  in  the  book  called  Luther,  and  which  they  there 
charged  me  with  having  adulterated,  as  I  had  in  some  meas- 
ure cured  the  error  by  pasting  a  paper  over  one  word.  It  is 
scandalous  that  any  person,  that  will  be  a  moral  heathen  or  liv- 
ing christian,  should  disperse  such  lies,  knowing  them  to  be 
such.  Page  20,  iv.  another  assassination  of  character  is  at- 
tempted against  a  minister  not  named,  who  is  known  by  the 
English  libel  of  David  to  be  the  Rev.  Mr.  Storke.  But  here 
he,  the  assassin,  useth  the  proper  word. ...not  manhood,  but  hu- 
manity. That  the  humanity  of  Christ  was  exalted  to  the  di- 
vine nature,  Mr.  Storke  always  preached ;  but  that  the  body  of 
Christ  fills  all  space,  none  but  idiots  can  believe.. ..and  that  was 
the  dispute.  (We  shall  prove  this,  if  necessary,  by  certificates, 
signed  by  such  who  value  an  oath.)  Enough  hath  been  said 
on  this  subject  before.  The  description  of  their  farce-meeting 
in  1819,  is  a  mutilated  assertion  against  Mr.  Storke,  and  is 
sufficiently  answered.  But  it  is  absolutely  false  that  David's 
deputies  iiiere  knew  that,  in  Synod,  1817,  his  ordination  was 
determined  on.  David  himself,  with  all  his  effrontery,  did 
not  say  so  in  his  libel.  What,  then,  must  this  author  be  ?  The 
deputies,  if  they  read  such  lies  printed  against  them,  must  de- 
tect it,  if  honest  men. 

With  his  usual  and  accustomed  itching  to  tell  stories,  the 
author  describes  the  beginning  of  the  Lincolnton  Synod  quite 
different  from  the  facts.  He  says  that  no  offer  was  made  by 
us  to  decide  the  dispute  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  scrip- 
ture. Shame  upon  you  !  Do  we  find  any  thing  in  scripture 
of  David  Henkel's  conduct,  and  how  we  ought  to  punish  him  I 
or  of  a  General  Synod  ?  We  then  knew  of  no  religious  dis- 
pute to  be  decided.  David,  in  1819,  had  openly  disowned  the 
doctrine  which  he  now  attempts  to  establish,  and  then  only 
started.  What  he  says  from  page  23  to  24,  against  me,  the 
Secretary,  is  an  absolute  lie.  It  was  in  the  German  and  En- 
glish language  denied  that  we  then  had  a  ratified  constitution  ; 
jbut  it  was,  also,  in  both  languages,  asserted  in  the  same  breath, 
jhat,  whether  it  is  called  constitution  or  rules  in  the  book  call- 
ed Luther,  we  were  bound  thereby.  (See  more  of  this  above.) 
Every  thing  of  a  discourse  they  had  with  us,  as  stated  from 
pge  24  to  27,  is  an  absolute  moral  forgery,  exactly  like  filling; 


4? 

up  an  order  for  $210  over  the  true  sum.  It  was  beneath  the 
Secretary  to  enter  into  a  dispute  about  the  bodily  presence  of 
the  Saviour  every  where,  on  David's  haughty  challenge — to 
whom  he  might  have  written  a  confidential  letter  on  the  pres- 
ence in  the  sacrament.  Page  26,  we  find  the  denominations 
of  all  christians,  excepting  such  Lutherans  as  they  are,  called 
sheep,  rams,  lambs,  cows,  oxen,  horses,  bears,  wolves,  wild 
cats,  foxes,  and  hogs.  I  thought  David  horrid  enough  in  ex- 
pressions, but  this  author  beats  him  to  atoms.  Read  it,  ye 
christians.. ..what  think  ye  of  such  a  being?  Page  27,  another 
story  is  asserted,  viz.  that  we  were  compelled  to  confess  that 
we  had  erred.  It  is  known  to  every  person  present,  that  as 
soon  as  the  error  was  found  out,  it  was  voluntarily  done  :  but 
see  what  I  said  above. 

The  author  comes  again  and  says,  "One  of  our  preachers  went 
to  Tennessee,  and  acted  in  our  name  ;  but  as  they  had  reason 
to  doubt,  in  the  honesty  of  that  preacher,"  &c.  This  is  trying 
to  assassinate  the  character  of  Mr.  Bell  in  the  dark,  as  not 
being  honest — no  doubt  because  he  would  not  assist  in  depri- 
ving us  of  g210.  The  author  must  surely  be  crack-brained, 
to  expect  that  when  errors  were  confessed,  we  thereby  depri- 
ved ourselves  from  uniting  with  a  General  Synod.  If  you 
read  on,  you  will  find  the  evidence  that  good  Philip  is  com- 
manded by  his  father  and  David  not  to  unite  with  us.  The 
last  paragraph,  p.  28,  is  again  killing  some  unnamed  preacher, 
with  a  charge  of  dereliction  from  the  bible  and  Augsburg  con- 
fession. Dark,  malicious  slander  is  your  object,  although. 
Was  you  a  man,  you  would  not  act  thus ;  for  who  can  answer 
such  stuff? 

The  author  then  hypocritically  addresseth  his  dear  friends, 
and  saith,  that  he  does  not  publish  the  stories  to  bring  us  into 
disrepute,  and  to  be  despised  and  rejected,  or  to  deprive  us  of 
our  honor  and  renown.  What  a  falsehood  !  Every  person 
that  can  read  will  say  that  such  is  your  main  object.  But  with 
all  honest  readers  it  will  fall  on  your  own  head. 

If  you  have  written  testimony  against  us,  as  you  say  p.  30, 
why  dare  you  not  name  the  subscribers  ?  Is  it  that  your  read- 
ers shall  not  judge  of  their  credibility,  or  whether  they  mind 
an  oath  ?  or  is  it  that  you  are  afraid  of  being  detected  in  for- 
gery ?  David  also  says  he  hath  a  certificate  against  the  Rev. 
Mr.  Storke :  he  names  no  signers.. ..no  doubt  for  some  such 
reasons  as  above. 

Poor  author !  must  you,  indeed,  always  hear  that  (as  you 
say,  p.  30)  you  are  the  cause  of  the  disunion,  and  that,  there- 
fore, you  had  to  invent  a  salve  out  of  David's  mudpuddle  ?  I 
really  pity  you.    I  wonder  that  jouhave  not  secured  the  copy 


4fe 

right*  We  have  treated  you  with  all  possible  lenity  in  our 
minutes,  and  you  cannot  deny  the  truth  as  there  stated  :  but 
see  appendix.  We  do  not  crave  your  union*  while  David, 
with  your  sanction,  directs  the  whirlpool.  Show  us  one  among 
us  who,  like  you,  preaches  for  bread,  as  you  insinuate,  p.  31. 
Every  one  of  us  in  N.  C.  have  our  plantations.  Have  you? 
or  do  you  live  by  preaching,  or  scribbling?  We  guess  who 
you  are  :  your  language  betrays  you  in  every  line.  Shame  ! 
how  you  treat  your  English  supporters,  towards  the  conclusion, 
by  saying  that  they  only  come  to  our  English  meetings  to  be 
diverted,  and  for  pastime. 

There  must  be  two  authors  to  the  pamphlet,  for  the  doctrine 
of  baptism  is  either  out  of  a  controversial  book,  or  by  a  man 
who  knows  how  to  write  his  language  not  at  all  like  the  first  part 
It  is  ingenious  enough  4  but  I  have  no  room  to  answer  it ;  and 
if  the  readers  will  take  their  bible  and  the  texts  here  mentioned, 
and  read  them  in  connexion,  they  will  be  benefited :  but  if  a 
grown  person  depends  upon  his  water-baptism  for  salvation, 
he  is  lost. 

It  is  surprising  that  in  the  German  pamphlet  we  read  noth- 
ing of  the  omnipresence  of  the  body  of  our  Saviour,  nor  of  the 
doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  This  shows  that  the  author 
hath  some  good  sense,  and  will  not  expose  himself  to  be  laugh- 
ed at.  The  author  dishes  again  the  poisonous  pamphlet  against 
the  union,  up  to  his  readers.  That  poison  now  ceaseth  to  op- 
erate, as  before  mentioned. 

That  he  added  the  Augsburg  confession,  is  good  ;  it  will 
keep  the  reader  in  mind  of  his  predecessors  300  years  ago. 

Why  do  you  print  in  your  German  and  English  hymn  books, 
songs  on  regeneration  ?  Why  do  you  speak  in  your  English 
book,  p.  265,  hymn  272,  of  mournful  prayer,  of  sorrow  and  dis- 
tress, of  grief  and  pain,  delay  of  repentance,  &c.  ?  And  now 
baptism  is  to  be  enough  ;  now  all  is  enthusiasm  what  savors  of 
sorrow  ;  now  kneeling  at  prayer  is  methodism ;  and  the  preach- 
ers in  whose  presence  tears  are  shed,  are  wizzards,  carrying 
shaved  rams  horns  in  their  pockets,  and  sow  that  on  the  people 
to  effect  such.  Did  not  you  say  so  ?  Is  there  not  a  doctor  in 
your  neighborhood  who  gives  out  medicines  to  drive  away 
such  devils  ?    Think  of  this,  my  anonymous  scribbler. 

This  short  review  I  thought  necessary  to  publish  against  the 
unknown  libeller,  that  when  it  circulates,  or  is  published  by  D. 
Henkel  from  the  pulpit,  the  hearers  may  be  prepared. 

You  will  excuse  vour  well  wisher, 

Gr.  8H0BEE. 


>A9 


APPENDIX 

COPY  OF  A  MEMORIAL., 
The  Memorial  of  Andrew  Hoyl,  of  N.  C.  Lincoln  county,  tp 
the  pious  and  reverend  Lutheran  Clergy,  at  Conference, 
now  in  session  in  Cabarrus  county,  N.  C.  at  the  Yellow 
Meeting-House. 
Most  worthy  and  dearly  beloved  in  Christ  Jesus  :  You? 
humble  memorialist,  being  a  citizen  of  Lincoln  county,  where 
he  was  born,  now  48  years  of  age,  and  having  lived  in  peace, 
harmony  and  friendship  with  my  neighbors  generally  until  now 
for  several  years,  that  peace  and  harmony  which  is  so  desira- 
ble has  been  assailed  by  Mr.  David  Henkel,  preacher,  as  your 
memorialist  thinks  he  can  make  it  appear  to  your  satisfaction ; 
and  in  order  to  lead  you  into  the  mystery,  I  will  make  as  brief 
a  statement  as  possible. 

Some  time  about  27  years  past,  your  memorialist  became  a 
member  of  the  German  presbyterian  denomination  ;  atod  that 
we  have  had  no  stated  preacher  of  that  order  for  20  years  ; 
that  I  paid  stipends  to  the  Lutheran  ministers,  and  was  held 
and  had  a  vote  in  said  church  as  though  I  was  in  full  com- 
munion with  them.  (I  will  here  refer  you  to  the  Rev.  Philip 
Henkel.)  There  existed  no  dispute  between  the  Lutherans 
and  presbyterians  in  which  your  memorialist  took  part,  to  his 
knowledge,  until  said  David  Henkel  came  to  bear  rule  amongst 
us :  and  the  cause,  I  think,  was  this — during  Mr.  Philip  Hen- 
kePs  time,  the  families  of  some  of  the  presbyterians  were  grad- 
ually joining  your  church,  which  your  memorialist  did  not 
oppose,  knowing  we  had  no  minister,  and  thinking  it  the  duty 
of  every  person  to  join  some  religious  society,  and  then  as  they 
received  Christ,  so  to  walk  in  him  :  yet  (I)  for  some  reason 
did  not  think  proper  to  join  your  church.  Meanwhile  the 
German  Lutheran  and  English  churches  joined  in  one  ;  and 
also  some  of  our  German  presbyterians  joined  the  English  ; 
and  your  memorialist  having  lost  hopes  of  getting  a  German 
minister  of  his  order,  and  having  an  earnest  desire  to  com- 
memorate and  show  forth  the  suffering  and  death  of  our  Lord 
and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  made  it  his  choice  to  commune 
with  the  English  presbyterians,  having  previously informed 
the  few  brethren  who  yet  remained  here,  and  they  followed 
the  example  ;  as  also  some  of  the  young  people  joined  said 
church — from  which  time  Mr.  David  Henkel  appeared  to  envy 
ills  ;  and  as  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hunter  omitted  laying  hands  at  the 
■  7 


sd 

time  of  receiving  hew  members  into  the  church,  Mr.  Henkel 
has  ever  since  preached  more  on  the  importance  of  laying  on 
of  hands  than  on  the  plain  doctrines  of  true  faith  in  Christ  and 
repentance  to  God  ;  and  held  and  taught  some  doctrines  which 
I  thought  dangerous.. ...such  [as  true  believers  were  as  perfect 
as  God       and  that  the  new  birth  of  which  our  Saviour  spoke 
to  Nicodefnus,  John  3,  was  water-baptism  only,  and  that  water- 
baptism  alone  would  produce  our  salvation  if  we  would  believe 
in  it ;  and  that  a  person  might  receive  the  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  be  and  remain  a  reprobate  ;  and  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  would  accompany  water-baptism  ;  and  that  ministers  of 
the  gospel  could  forgive  sins  ;  and  that,  by  the  laying  on  of 
hands  by  a  minister  fully  ordained,  the  said  Holy  Ghost  would 
fully  communicate  himself  to  such  persons  ;  and  that  those 
who  omitted  that,  left  out  one  link  (I  suppose}  of  the  means 
of  salvation  ;  and  thereby  caused  some  to  doubt  whether  they 
could  be  saved  without.    Some  of  those  heads  I  opposed,  and 
endeavored  to  persuade  some  of  the  congregation  to  look  be- 
yond the  watchmen,  and  search  the  scripture,  which  appeared 
to  set  him  entirely  against  your  memorialist,  and  called  the 
presbyterians  infidels.    I  told  him  that  was  a  hard  charge  :  he 
said  it  wa3,  but  he  could  not  help  it,  as  they  deny  eating  the 
•  real  body  of  Christ  and  drinking  his  real  blood  in  the  Lord's 
Supper  and;  all  that  did,  were  infidels  :  and  instead  of  get- 
ting the  neighbors  to  weigh  his  doctrine,  they  got  offended  at 
your  memorialist,  whose  motives  were  pure.    And  since  which 
time,  some  of  them  have  not  held  me  with  that  esteem  that 
they  did  before  :  and  to  make  the  measure  full,  Mr.  D.  Henkel 
swore  an  oath  before  me,  (being  a  justice  of  the  peace,)  part 
of  which  was  disputed,  as  he  also  acknowledged  he  had  forgot : 
(I  will  here  refer  you  to  sundry  depositions  accompanying 
this)— see  No.  3 :  which  (oath)  was  circulated  abroad  by  the 
plaintiff,  or  her  friends,  against  whom  the  tenor  of  his  oath 
ran.    After  some  time,  inquiry  was  continually  making  with 
xrie  with  respect  to  said  oath  ;  but  I  refused  frequently  to 
tell,  and  desired  a  meeting,  particularly  where  several  men 
from  the  different  congregations  should  attend,  so  that  the  news 
might  go  in  the  shape  I  gave  it  to  the  several  churches  ;  and 
that  I  also  wished  Mr.  Henkel  to  be  present,  and  telling  them 
that  I  expected  that  I  and  he  would  not  differ,  as  you  will  see 
by  a  certificate,  No.  1,  and  hear  from  Mr.  Mozer.    But  at 
length,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Mozer  and  several  of  HenkePs  elders 
insisted  so  hard  to  know  what  he  had  sworn,  and  I  at  last  re- 
lated it  to  them  as  it  was,  and  as  the  depositions  will  show. 

*  These  eight  words  were,  in  a  manner,  stricken  out ;  but  as  they  ar« 
ttecessary  for  tte  connexion  they  are  retained^ 


*1 


And  it  appears  to  your  memorialist,  that  from  that  time  Mr* 
Henkel  concluded  he  could,  by  his  art  and  insinuations,  cause 
the  world  to  believe  that  I  had  reported  falsehoods  on  him';* 
that  he  had  neither  sworn  any  thing  but  what  was  true ;  and 
also,  that  he  never  came  back  to  make  an  acknowledgment,  as 
$vill  more  fully  appear  by  deposition  No.  2.  Your  humble 
memorialist  is  therefore  compelled  to  charge  the  said  David 
Henkel  with  being  a  rash  man,  and  with  having  taken  very 
unfair  means  to  rob  me  of  my  reputation,  as  will  plainly  appear  ; 
and  in  order  to  carry  said  intrigue  into  effect,  proceeded  to 
take  certificates  "  of  persons  who  knew  nothing  of  his  oath,  and 
reported  that  I  had  told  lies  on  him,  and  spread  abroad  other 
falsehoods  against  me,  as  I  think,"  which  caused  me  to  take 
depositions  and  certificates  to  clear  myself  of  his  false  reports, 
and  show  that  he  has  been  more  a  disturber  of  the  peace  than 
a  peace7maker ;  and,  I  am  afraid,  lacks  the  one  thing  needful. 

And  now  your  humble  memorialist  earnestly  solicits  your 
pious  body  to  take  the  foregoing  into  your  wise  consideration, 
and  devise  that  plan  which  will  be  calculated  to  bring  about 
a  speedy  reconciliation,  and  establish  as  soon  as  possible  that 
harmony,  peace  and  friendship  which  existed  among  us  before 
he,  the  said  David  Henkel,  bore  rule  among  us.  And  your 
humble  memorialist,  as  in  duty  bound,  will  ever  pray, 

April  24,  1819.  AND'W.  HOYL. 

P.  S.  Please  to  pardon  my  boldness  in  thus  troubling  you  ; 
and  if  any  of  my  expressions  are  rash,  also  excuse  me,  as  I  am 
a  stronger  to  such  business.  A.  hoyx-V 


Certificates,  only  necessary  for  such  as  do  not  know  Mr.  Hoyh 

[Copy.]  That  Andrew  Hoyl,  Esquire,  has  been  in  the  cir- 
cle of  my  particular  acquaintance  more  than  twenty*three  years3 
uniformly  living  where  he  now  lives,  ^bout  eight  miles  from 
my  house,  and  as  uniformly  supporting  the  character  of  a  fair 
dealer  as  a  merchant,  an  impartial  administrator  of  justice  as 
a  magistrate,  a  peaceable,  moral,  and  useful  citizen,  in  full 
communion  writh,  and  highly  .respectable  standing  in,  the  pres- 
byterian  church.    Certified  at  Lincolnton,  this  28th  of  April P 

1819.  H.  HUNTER,  D.  D. 

[.GQPY]..«.«Sfafe  of  North-Carolina,! 

Lincoln  County.  J 
We,  the  undersigned,  being  justices  .of  the  peace  in  and  fas 
$he  county  aforesaid,  do  hereby  certify,  that  Andrew  'Hoyl}K 


Slsquire,  (the  bearer  hereof,)  with  whom  we  have  been  per* 
sonally  acquainted  for  several  years,  has  been  an  acting  justice 
of  the  peace  in  and  for  said  county  of  Lincoln  for  a  number  of 
years  ;  that  he  has  always  supported  the  character  of  a  vigilant, 
attentive  and  judicious  justice  of  the  peace  ;  and  that,  as  a 
justice  of  the  peace  as  well  as  a  private  citizen,  he  has  and  now 
does  support  the  character  of  an  honest  and  peaceable  citizen^ 
&c.    April  23,  1819. 

John  Willfong,  J.  P.  Peter  Hoyl,  J.  P.     John  Allen, 
L  Holland,  J.  P.       G.  Milligan,  J.  P.    Wm.  Martin,, 
J.  D.  Graham,  J.  P.   John  Falls,  J.  P. 


[copies.] 

State  of  North-Carolina^  April  16th,  1819. 

Lincoln  County.      y         To  whom  it  may  concern* 

This  may  certify,  that  we  have  been  acquainted  with  An«* 
drew  Hoyl,  Esq.  for  about  30  years ;  and  that  he  has  always 
borne  the  character  of  an  honest,  moral  citizen,  and  a  man  of 
truth ;  and  that  he  has  represented  our  county  in  the  General 
Assembly  for  several  years,  and  as  long  as  he  offered  for  that 
place  ;  and  has  acted  as  justice  of  the  peace  for  fifteen  years., 
or  upwards,  and  has  always  been  respected  in  his  proceedings. 
Given  under  our  hands. 

David  Ramsour,  D.  Shiffard,  Jacob  Summy,  John  M.  Motz, 
Jacob  Forney,  acquainted  for  Id  years,  Jacob  Ramsour  for  20 
years,  John  Fullenwider>  Peter  Forney,  Daniel  Hoke,  J.  Gra- 
ham, Wm.  J,  Wilson. 

Now  readers,  could  any  set  of  honest  men  reject  the  petition 
of  a  man  thus  recommended,  only  because  he  does  not  belong  to 
our  church  ?  Shall  we  not  believe  his  petition,  and  what  follows  i 


[copy.] 

State  of  North-Carolina,*)  To  any  lawful  officer,  to  exe- 
Lincoln  County.        J  cute  and  return. 

Whereas  Andrew  Hoyl,  Esq.  made  oath  before  me,  Isaac 
Holland,  one  of  the  justices  of  tbe  peace  for  said  county,  to  the 
following,  and  tp  the  best  of  his  knowledge  :  That  Davkl 
Henkel,  (preacher,)  of  said  county,  came  before  him,  the  said 
Andrew  Hoyl,  in  company  with  Susanna  Williams  and  David 
Lineberger,  and  informed  said  Hoyl  that  he,  the  said  Henkel, 
was  summoned  to  attend  at  the  court  of  Lincoln,  in  a  suit  then 
in  court*  Susanna  Williams  against  Lineberger,  and  that  he 
could  pot  well  attend^  and  requested  him,  the  said  Hovl,  tp 


take  his  deposition,  by  consent  of  both  parties,  and  not  by  aa 
order  or  commission  from  court ;  which  was  done,  being  much 
solicited  by  said  Henkel:  and  that  said  Henkel  (preacher) 
made  oath  before  him,  the  said  Hoyl,  in  due  form  of  law,  that 
he  had  endeavored  to  bring  the  above  suit  to  a  compromise  ; 
but  that,  to  his  knowledge,  no' offer  had  been  made  by  the  defen- 
dant to  the  said  Susanna  Williams,  or  her  friend  Adam  Costner y 
to  compromise  or  draw  said  suit,  nor  by  any  person  for  said 
Lineberger ;  which  the  said  Henkel  penned  in  the  deposition 
himself.  And  the  said  Hoyl  further  saith,  oa  oath,  that  he  put 
the  following  question  at  the  request  of  the  plaintiff,  that  it  was 
said  that  he,  the  said  David  Henkel,  should  have  told  several 
of  the  neighbors  that  said  Lineberger  had  made  an  offer  of 
S  100  to  the  plaintiff,  or  Adam  Costner  for  her,  if  she  would 
draw  the  suit,  or  that  Lineberger  had  authorised  him  to  offer 
it,  and  that  he  had  done  so:  to  which  said  Henkel  answered, 
that  he  had  not  ;  and  that  if  the  said  Hoyl  would  ask  those 
neighbors,  he  would  find  it  to  be  a  lie — (  which  last  part,  Hoyl 
thinks,  was  perhaps  not  put  into  the  deposition,  not  being  ma- 
terial to  the  suit.)  And  the  said  Hoyl  further  saith,  that  he  has 
reason  to  believe,  from  information,  and  doth  believe,  that  an 
offer  was  made  by  the  defendant  or  Henkel,  to  the  plaintiff  or 
Costner;  and  also,  that  Henkel  did  inform  some  of  the  neigh- 
bors that  the  above  offer  of  §100  had  been  made:  and  further, 
that  the  said  Henkel  called  on  the  said  Hoyl  a  few  days  after, 
and  agreed  that  he  had  forgotten  that  he  had  told  any  person^ 
that  said  offer  was  made  ;  and  requested  said  Hoyl  to  tell  him 
whether  or  not  he  could  be  prosecuted  with  effect,  and  that 
Hoyl  made  the  following  answer.. ..he  did  not  believe  he  could, 
unless  it  could  be  made  appear  that  he  knew  it  to  be  an  untruth 
when  he  swore  it;  to  which  Henkel  answered,  that  they  could 
not  do  so,  as  he  thought  rt  was  true  when  he  swore  :  And  fur- 
ther, that  the  said  Hoyl  Is  informed  that  said  Henkel  is  en* 
deavoring  to  clear  himself  of  the  above  at  a  distance,  and  says 
that  those  who  have  reported  said  oath  are  reporting  falsehoods 
against  him,  and  that  he  could  recover  damages  if  he  would 
bring  suit. 

Now  therefore,  in  order  to  show  whether  or  not  an  action 
would  lie  against  said  Henkel,  and  at  the  same  time-  to  show 
to  the  world  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  those  who  have  repeated 
the  above  oaths,  or  the  substance  thereof,  you  are  commanded 
to  summon  David  Lineberger,  John  Hovis,  sen'r.  Michael 
Costner,  and  Susanna  Williams,  (now  Singleton,)  to  appear 
before  some  justice^,  to  give  evidence  respecting  the  premises^ 

I,  HOLLAND,  jT,  ^ 

April 


Korth-Carolina,  1 

Lincoln  County.  J 

Susanna  Singleton,  being  duly  sworn  on  her  oath,  saitk, 
that  she  was  at  Andrew  HoyPs,  Esq.  when  David  Henkel 
(preacher)  was  sworn  with  respect  to  a  suit  then  in  court, 
5-  Williams  vs.  D.  Lineberger  ;  and  that  the  said  Henkel  said, 
on  his  oath,  that  he  had  been  once  at  Adam  Ccstner's,  trying 
to  persuade  them  to  make  up  the  suit,  and  that  he  did  not 
recollect  of  any  offer  being  made  by  Lineberger  to  make  up  ; 
and  said  Hoyi  put  the  following  question,  at  her  request,  to 
said  tienkel,  whether  or  not  he  had  told  some  of  the  neighbors 
that  Lineberger  had  made  an  offer,  or  some  body  for  him,  of 
an  §100  to  the  plaintiff,  to  make  up  the  suit  ;  he  answered, 
that  he  had  not— and  if  he,  Hoyl,  would  ask  the  neighbors,  he 
Tvould  find  it  to  be  a  lie.  This  deponent  being  further  asked, 
whether  or  not  she  knows  of  any  such  offer  being  made,  saith 
that,  being  at  the  house  of  Adam  Costner  when  the  parties  and 
D»  Henkel  were  present,  said  Henkel  advised  them  to  make 
u p  the  suit ;  and  Adam  Costner  said,  if  Lineberger  would  pay 
§100  she  might  or  could  make  up — but  Lineberger  refused  i 
whereupon  Henkel  said  to  him,  you  had  better  give  it;  Line- 
berger said  he  would  give  it,  if  she  would  pay  the  cost ;  Costner 
refused  that ;  Henkel  said  he  would  pay  part  of  the  cost  him- 
self, rather  than  have  a  fuss,  and  wanted  no  more  to  be  done 
about  it  till  he  came  there  to  preach.  Andrew  Hoyl  asked 
her  if  she  knows  what  came  of  Henkel's  deposition— saith 
that  she  does  not  know  ;  but  saith  that  Henkel,  about  three 
weeks  ago,  said  that  he  expected  said  Hoyl  had  it  yet,  for  he 
lent  it  to  Jacob  Forney  at  court. 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  this  Fth  day  of  April,  1819,  before 
me*  ,1ER 

SUSANNA  +  WILLIAMS* 

JoJm  Holland,  J.  /V 


At  the  same  time  and  place,  Catharine  Hoyl,  being  exam- 
ined on  her  oath,  saith  that  she  was  present  when  the  above 
oath  was  put  to  the  said  D.  Henkel,  and  saith  that  said  Henkel 
said,  on  his  oath,  that  he  never  was  authorised  to  offer,  or 
heard  David  Lineberger  offer,  to  his  knowledge,  a  glOO  for  a 
compromise  in  the  above  suit,  S.  Williams  vs.  D.  Lineberger ; 
then  he  being  asked,  at  the  request  of  S.  Williams,  by  A,  Hoyl, 
whether  he  (Henkel)  never  told  one  of  the  neighbors  that 
Lineberger  had  offered  $100,  or  any  body  for  him,  to  make  up 
suit,  he  said  he  never  ^id  ;  and  if  he,  Hoyl,  would  ask  the 


neighbors  about  it,  he  would  find  it  to  be  a  lie :  And  furthef 
saith,  that  said  Henkel,  a  few  days  after,  came  back  to  said 
Hoyl,  and  seerfied  troubled  ;  then  asked  Hoyl  if  he  .recollected 
ivhat  he  had  sworn  before  him  with  respect  to  the  above  suit; 
Hoyl  said  he  did,  and  related  the  substance  of  the  abovt%  as 
nigh  as  she  recollected ;  tc  which  Henkel  made  no  objections, 
but  asked  him  (Hoyl)  if  he  thought  they  could  do  any  thirsg 
with  him,  like  prosecuting  him,  for  what  he  had  sworn  ;  to 
which  Hoyl  said,  that  he  did  not  think  they  could  do  any  thing 
with  him,  unless  that  they  could  prove  that  he  knew  it  to  be 
false  at  the  time  he  swore  it. 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  this  7th  day  of  April,  1819,  before 
me*,  John  Holland,  J.  P.  c.  hoyl. 


David  Lineberger,  being  duly  sworn  as  above,  and  in  the 
above  case,  saith  that  he  was  present  when  the  above  oath  was 
taken  oy  D.  Henkel ;  and  saith  that  Henkel  wrote  down  and 
read  in  his  hearing,  that  he  had  offered,  or  made  the  proposi- 
tion, for  Lineberger  to  the  plaintiff,  §100,  but  Lineberger  ob- 
jected to  it,  but  does  not  recollect  what  Henkel  related  when 
sworn  verbally;  then  at  the  request  of  the  plaintiff,  Susanna 
Williams,  Hoyl  asked  Henkel  if  he  had  not  told  some  of  the 
neighbors  that  Lineberger,  or  he  for  him,  offered  glOO  to 
make  up  the  suit-*- does  not  recollect  the  answer:  And  further 
saith,  that  he  believeth  he  saw  the  deposition  in  the  hands  of 
Peter  Hoyl^  Esq,  at  the  court  of  Lineberger's  trial,  but  does 
not  know  What  became  of  them. 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  the  7th  of  April,  1819. 
John  Hollandy  J.  P.  datid  lineberg-er.* 


John  Costner,  being  examined  on  oath,  saith,  that  the  par- 
ties in  the  above  suit  being  present  at  the  house  of  Adam  Cost- 
ner, and  David  Henkel  proposed  that  they  would  make  up  the 
said  suit,  and  said  that  Lineberger  would  give  SlOO  if  they 
would  make  it  up  -7  Adam  Costner  said  that  they  would  take 
the  g>10Q  if  Lineberger  would  pay  the  cost — but  Lineberger 
objected  to  it — but  afterwards  consented,  if  they  would  pay 

*  To  understand  the  case,  it  is  this : — S.  Williams,  ward  of  Adam  Costner, 
was  aggrieved  by  Lineberger ;  she  sued  him  by  her  friend  Costner ;  Lineber- 
ger wanted  to  make  up,  and  got  Henkel  to  do  it,  to  which  he  himself  inclined 
for  peace  sake,  apparently;  afterwards  an  understanding  took  place  between 
Henkel  and  Lineberger,  and  lie  wanted  to  screen  him,  &c.  I  may  be  wrong, 
mt  so  l  understand  it*  G.  S. 


65 


the  cost;  then  Henkel  said  he  would  pay  the  cost  himself, 
rather  than  it  should  not  be  made  up,  and  desired  that  Adam 
Costner  should  do  no  more  in  it  till  he  came  back  again,  and 
then  it  should  be  made  up. 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  April  7,  1819* 
J.  Holland)  J.  P,  john  costne&.. 

John  Hovis,  being  also  examined,  saith  that  Henkel  (being 
in  company  together  at  HoVis's  own  house)  said  that  Lineber- 
ger  offered  Costner,  or  Susanna  Williams,  $100;  then  after 
that  again,  that  he,  Hovis,  asked  Henkel  who  told  him  that 
Lineberger  offered  the  SlOO — he  said  that  Adam  Costner  told 
him  so. 

Sworn  and  subscribed  this  7th  of  April,  1319. 
John  Holland^  J.  P.  john  hovis. 

Susanna  Costner,  also  being  examined,  saith  the  same  or 
the  substance  of  the  above,  what  John  Costner  said  ;  and  also, 
that  said  Costner  agreed  to  wait  on  those  conditions,  viz.  that 
it  should  be  settled  when  he,  Henkel,  came  back. 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed,  this  7th  day  of  April,  1819,  before 
pie. 

HEll 

SUSANNA  +  COSTNER. 
Jotei  Holland,  f.  maJie. 

Adam  Costner,  being  also  examined  in  the  above  case,  on 
his  oath,  saith  that,  at  his  own  house,  the  parties  being  present, 
viz.  S.  Williams, ■  D>  Lineberger,  and  D.  Henkel  (preacher) 
being  present,  advised  to  make  up  their  disputes,  and  men- 
tioned that  Lineberger  should  give  him,  Costner,  SlOO;  then 
Lineberger  agreed  to  give  her  §100,  if  she  would  pay  the  cost ; 
then  he,  Costner,  objected  to  it,  unless  he,  Lineberger,  wrould 
pay  the  cost ;  then  David  Henkel  said  that  he  would  rather  pay 
the  cost  himself  than  that  they  would  not  make  it  up  ;  and  said 
he  would  pay  it  himself,  rather  than  have  any  more  disputes 
#bout  it ;  and  said  that  if  he,  Adam  Costner,  would  wait,  and 
do  no  more  about  it  till  he  came  back,  it  should  be  made  up 
then  ;  he,  Costner,  agreed  that  he  would  do  no  more  in  the 
case  on  those  conditions,  and  he  believes  shook  hands  with 
said  Henkel  to  the  case,  and  then  considered  it  made  up,  upon 
their  word  being  exchanged  :  Also  saith,  that  he,  Henkel,  some 
time  after,  acknowledged  to  this  deponent,  that  he  had  told 
John  Hovis  that  the  elFer  of  an  $100  had  been  mack  to  tj*&! 


if 


above  plaintiff,  and  that  it  is  so,  and  that  he  never  would  forget 
it  again.  Question  by  Andrew  Hoyl  to  deponent..,. .Did  you 
call  on  Michael  Costner  after  the  above  oath  was  sworn,  and 
ask  him  whether  or  not  D.  Henkel  had  told  him  that  the  offer 
of  a  glOO  had  been  made  to  S.  Williams?  Answers  in  the 
affirmative.  Sworn  to  and  subscribed  this  7th  of  April,  1819, 
before  me,  JY  Holland,  J.  P.  adam  costner. 


I  do  hereby  certify,  that  the  foregoing  warrant  and  deposi- 
tions are  true  copies. ...to  wit,  of  Sus.  Williams,  (now  Single- 
ton,) C.  Hoyl,  David  Lineberger,  John  Costner,  John  Hovis, 
Sus.  Costner,  and  Adam  Costner* 

Certified  by  me,  akdrew  hoyl. 


If  I  understand  it,  the  original  depositions  sworn  to  by  Da- 
vid Henkel  are  not  now  to  be  found— and  the  question  is, 
Where  are  they  i    The  following  certificates  relate  thereto  t 

[copy.] 

This  may  certify,  that  Peter  Hoyl,  Esq*  told  me  on  Thurs* 
day  last,  after  informing  him  what  David  Lineberger  said  res* 
pecting  a  deposition  taken  before  me  of  David  Henkel  in  a 
suit,  Sus.  Williams  vs.  Lineberger,  that  Mr.  D.  Henkel  gave 
nim  papers  ;  that  said  Peter  Hoyl  understood  it  was  a  depo- 
sition taken  at  Andrew  Hoyl's,  and  that  he  should  give  it  to 
D.  Lineberger  at  court,  as  he  could  not  attend  there- — and  that 
he  had  done  so ;  but  that  he  does  not  know  whether  he  read 
it  or  not ;  and  that  some  time  after,  Mr.  Henkel  said  he  wished 
to  get  it  again ;  and  he  told  him  he  had  given  it  to  Lineber- 
ger :  and  that  still  later,  Mr.  Henkel  informed  him  that  Line- 
berger told  him  (Hoyl)  had  lost  it :  and  after  that  again,  Mr. 
Henkel  told  him  that  the  paper  he  had  given  him  was  not  the 
deposition,  but  a  copy  only.    Certified  April  12,  1819. 

ANDREW  HOYL. 

I  do  hereby  certify,  that  the  above  is,  in  substance,  what  I 
related  to  Andrew  Hoyl.  peter  hoyl. 


State  of  North-Carolina^ 
Lincoln  County.  J 
This  may  certify,  that  Jacob  Wike  and  Elizabeth  Wike 
made  oath  in  due  form  of  law  before  me,  Joseph  Lawrance* 
8 


6tic  of  trie  justices  far  and  in  said  county,  that  David  Henkei 
(preacher)  came  to  their  house  sometime  in  the  night  of  the 
gth  inst.  oA  his  way  from  the  Mountain  Meeting  House  to  St. 
Paul's,  and  immediately  before  he  sat  down,  said  that  Andrew 
Hoyl,  Esq.  had  reported  in  the  country  that  he,  the  said  D. 
Henkei,  had  sworn  a  lie,  which  was  utterly  false  ;  and  that  he 
had  now  a  copy  of  his  oath,  and  the  same  certified,  and  other 
papers  so  well  authenticated  that  he  could  entirely  clear  him- 
self of  said  charge ;  that  he  had  counselled  lawyer  Williamson, 
and  had  proceeded  according  to  his  direction ;  and  he  un- 
doubtedly could  now  recover  against  him,  the  said  Hoyl,  in 
consequence  of  his  false  report ;  and  read  his  copy  and  certifi- 
cates ;  and  said  that  Hoyl  had  done  all  this  only  to  break  up 
the  Lutheran  churches :  that  he,  Hoyl,  had  long  (for  three 
years)  endeavored  to  entrap  him  ;  but  that  he,  Henkei,  was 
too  cunning  a  fox— that  he  could  hop  about  from  place  to  place, 
so  that  he,  Hoyl,  could  not  ensnare  him  ;  but  that  he,  Henkei, 
had  now  caught  said  Hoyl ;  that  he  certainly  could  recover 
damages  of  hirn  in  consequence  of  said  false  reports,  unless 
Hoyl  could  or  would  prove  that  he  never  said  what  I  charge 
him  with  ;  but  that  §2000  would  not  clear  said  Hoyl,  as  he 
would  bring  suit  in  consequence  of  being  dismissed  as  a 
preacher  at  St.  Paul's  church*  in  consequence  of  said  HoyPs 
false  reports  ;  and  that  he  would  advertise  him  in  the  public 
papers  ;  and  by  that,  and  recovering  the  above  damages,  he 
would  make  Hoyl  look  as  black  as  their  black  wall :  And  fur- 
ther said,  that  Andrew  Hoyl  kept  the  depositions  concealed^ 
which  could  be  made  appear  by  Jacob  Forney,  as  Forney  told 
him  he  heard  said  Hoyl  read  it  to  Ramsour  and  old  Mr.  Sum- 
my  in  Lincolnton  :  and  further  said,  he  had  compelled  said 
Hoyl  to  acknowledge  three  times  in  the  open  congregation, 
that  he  had  belied  him,  Henkei ;  and  particularly  in  charging 
him  with  having  altered  bis  brother  Philip's  appointment  for 
preaching,  and  then  endeavored  to  put  it  on  said  Philip  Hen- 
kei ;  but  that  he  had  a  letter  in*  his  possession  that  would  both 
clear  him  and  Philip ;  and  that  if  he  did  sue,  that  he  would  not 
only  bring  suit  against  Hoyl,  but  also  against  Polly  Fullen- 
wider  and  one  of  HoyPs  brother-in-laws  ;  but  said,  upon  the 
whole,  if  it  was  true  what  he  had  been  told  a  few  hours  ago, 
at  John  Abernathy's  at  dinner  that  same  day,  by  one  of  Mr. 
Abemathy's  sons,  (perhaps  Jacob,)  that  said  Hoyl  had  called 
at  Mr.  Jacob  Forney's,  one  of  his  (Henkel's)  elders,  who  was 
.hard  against  said  Hoyl,  and  that  he  was  so  tightly  pressed  res- 
pecting the  aforesaid  false  reports*  and  had  asked  Forney 
whether  it  would  do  if  he,  Hoyl,  would  give  a  libel  ?  that 
Forney  answered,  he  supposed  it  would :  and  said  that  young 


o9 


Mr.  Abernathy  was  present  part  of  the  time,  and  saw  Hoyl 
there ;  and  that  he,  Hoyl,  had  then  proceeded,  and  gave  a  libel 
to  his  said  elder,  Jacob  Forney  ;  and  moreover,  agreed  to  have 
it  printed  at  Salisbury,  and  advertise  himself  a  liar.  On  which 
Mrs.  Wike  asked  hiin  (Henkel)  who  had  given  a  libel  ?  And 
he  replied,  Andrew  Hoyl,  Esq.  At  which  we,  the  undersign* 
cd,  were  surprised,  being  acquainted  with  the  reputation  of  said 
Hoyl.  And  Mr.  Jacob  Wike  told  him  he  had  better  be  care- 
ful what  he  reported  on  said  Hoyl,  perhaps  Abernathy  would 
deny;  to  which  he  answered,  that  he  could  prove  all  he  saidf 
that  there  were  three  or  four  persons  present  when  Abernathy 
told  him.. ..viz  :  one  or  two  of  his  brothers,  and  his  father  and 
mother.  That  Mrs.  Wike  then  told  him,  that  A.  Hoyl  waj* 
so  much  respected  in  this  quarter,  that  nearly  all  would  be 
disposed  to  believe  all  he  said ;  that  he,  Hoyl,  was  always  call- 
ed and  held  as  an  uncommonly  good  man :  to  which  Henkel 
answered,  if  they  knew  of  said  Hoyl  what  he  knew,  they  would 
be  done  with  him,  for  in  his  own  parts  he  was  entirely  des- 
pised, and  no  person  thinks  more  of  him,  Hoyl,  than  of  an  old 
dog.  And  further  said,  that  they  went  with  him  the  day  fol- 
lowing (Good  Friday)  to  preaching  at  St.  Paul's  church,  where 
he  related  part  of  the  above  in  the  meeting-house,  before  ser^ 
mon,  to  his  elders,  Loots  and  Boleck,  Mrs.  Wike  only  present ; 
and  mentioned  that  it  was  Andrew  Hoyl,  as  she  understood, 
against  whom  he  could  recover  damages  :  and  that  after  ser- 
mon, he  informed  the  congregation  of  a  considerable  part  of 
the  foregoing,  but  did  not  mention  HoyPs  name,  but  said  it 
was  a  relation  of  his  wife's,  and  also  related  to  many  of  that 
congregation.  And  deponents  further  say,  that  they  asked 
him  whether  he  had  not^  after  swearing  the  aforesaid  oath,  gone 
back  to  said  Hoy  Ps,  and  acknowledged  that  he  had  forgot  a  party 
or  that  he  had  told  any  person  that  an  offer  of  glOO  had  been 
made  to  the  plaintiff?  To  which  he  an5wered,  that  he  had 
not ;  and  that  it  was  an  arrant  lie  that  he  had  ever  gone  back; 
and  that  he,  Hoyl,  had  set  on  William  Kline,  perhaps  fee'd  or 
bribed  him. 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  this  20th  day  of  April,  1819,  b$f 
fore  me,  J.  JLawrance,  J.  P. 

A  true  copy  :  G.  Shober; 

•     »  .      '  HIS 

JACOB   +  WIKE. 

'  ;  «'*-Jr  •>  *  MARK.  ? 

■i      V  .  .  '    •        HEB»  •  ' 

ELIZABETH  +  WIKI&i 


[cOPY.]t 

This  may  certify,  that  Andrew  Hoyl,  Esq.  never  spoke  to 
me,  William  Kline,  respecting  an  oath  sworn  by  David  Henkel 
before  said  Hoyl,  in  a  suit,  Sus.  Williams  vs.  D.  Lineberger, 
xior  I  to  him,  until  this  day. 

Certified  by  me,  William  Kline,  April  15,  1819. 
Test :  Paul  Conrad* 


March  27,  1819. 

'  TO  ALL  WHOM  IT  MAY  CONCERN. 

I  certify,  that  Andrew  Hoyl,  Esq.  never  read  a  deposition 
to  me  that  the  Rev.  David  Henkel  gave,  nor  that  he  ever  had 
it;  and  further,  that  no  person  ever  told  me  they  heard  A, 
iloyl.  Esq.  read  it,  or  say  that  he  had  it  in  his  possession  after 
the  time  of  giving  it. 

JACOB  TORNEYo 

A  true  copy  from  the  original :  Andrew  HoyL 
A  copy  froni  the  above  ;  G.  S. 


Copy  of  a  letter  from  the  Reverend  James  Hall  to  G.  Shoberr 
November  13,  1818. 

Rev.  and  dear  Brother  :  In  my  itinerations  last  fall,  having 
sent  an  appointment  to  Cosner's  meeting-house  in  Lincoln 
county,  when  I  came  near  the  place,  was  informed  that  the 
Rev.  D.  Henkel  was  to  have  a  communion  there  on  that  day, 
and  attended  there  on  Saturday.  Although  I  preached  after 
him  on  that  day,  he  seemed  shy  of  me  ;  but  having  a  desire  to 
have  some  conversation  with  him,  on  account  of  what  I  had 
heard  concerning  him,  invited  myself  to  go  that  evening  to 
Mr.  David  Conner's,  where  I  understood  he  was  to  lodge  the 
following  night.  After  dinner,  I  invited  him  to  take  a  walk 
with  me,  which  he  did — -and  he  immediately  introduced  the 
subject  of  the  presence  of  Christ's  body  and  blood,  or  what  he 
sometimes  termed,  his  humanity  in  the  elements.  I  attempted 
repeatedly  to  turn  the  conversation  into  some  other  channel, 
m&  told  him  I  wished  to  spend  the  time  in  conversing  on  ex- 


6> 


perimental  religion,  or  something  which  tended  to  edify  the 
heart — but  nothing  would  satisfy  him  only  the  above  subject, 
t  told  him  that  his  view  of  the  subject  savored  more  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  doctrine  than  any  thing  I  had  ever  known  by 
the  celebrated  Luther  :  but  this  he  would  not  acknowledge. 

On  Sabbath,  he  took  for  his  text  I,  Cor.  10,  15  and  16 ;  and 
from  every  view  of  his  doctrine  I  could  take,  the  tenor  of  it 
was  as  palpable  transubstantiation  as  ever  was  exhibited  by  a 
Catholic  priest,  although  probably  not  in  such  express  terms. 
I  say,  whatever  his  bigoted  adherents  may  say, that  it  appeared 
to  me,  and  such  appears  to  be  the  influence  of  his  doctrine, 
and  some  of  his  hearers.  This  i  say,  from  what  ope  of  them 
said,  when  he  considered  himself  about  to  enter  the  eternal 
world,  as  I  was  informed.  He  said  he  desired  to  receive  the 
sacrament  before  he  died.  Being  asked  why  i  he  replied,  "  I 
cannot  think  of  dying  without  .having  God  (or  Christ-— I  do 
not  recollect  which)  in  my  belly."  For  the  correctness  of  this 
I  will  not  vouch ;  but  this  information  I  had  from  some  in. 
those  parts. 

Fully  two-thirds  of  his  sermon  was  on  the  above  subject, 
under  which  I  became  very  uneasy,  as  I  suspected  that  I  was 
the  object  to  which  he  pointed,  from  what  passed  between  us 
on  the  preceding  evening ;  and  I  intended  either  to  leave  the 
house,  or  publicly  request  him  to  say  something  to  the  people^ 
Hiore  edifying  on  the  solemn  ordinance  before  him.  I  thea 
asked  Mr.  D.  Cosner,  who  sat  near  me,  whether  that  was  a 
new  doctrine  with  Mr.  Henkel,  or  whether  he  had  heard  it 
from  him  before  ?  And  he  told  me  he  had  frequently  heard 
him  on  it.  I  then  concluded  that  his  observations  were  poin- 
ted to  me.  He  observing  my  uneasiness,  immediately  quitted 
the  subject,  and  said,  It  is  now  tim«  to  say  something  as  to  the 
qualifications  of  comniunicants-^-on  which  he  made  some  per- 
tinent and  useful  observations. 

I  was  informed  that  several  of  his  former  adherents  had  left 
him,  perhaps  both  on  account  of  his  doctrine  and  discipline — * 
which  to  me,  from  what  I  saw  in  and  heard  from  him,  he  ap- 
peared to  me  the  most  assuming  and  self-important  man  I  ever 
saw  in  the  sacred  desk. 

I  fear,  from  what  I  heard  from  him  myself,  and  what  X 
learned  from  others,  that  he  is  making  not  agreeable  work 
among  that  people.  Therg  are  several  among  them  who  wish 
to  hear  our  clergy ;  but  to  fhis  he  seems  to  be  opposed. 

There  appears  to  me  a  striking  contrast  between  him  and 
his  little  brother  Philip,  with  whom  I  was  acquainted,  and  whq 
preached  with  me  at  a  communion  held  in  Lincoln  ;  and  the 
people  appear  to  have  the  same  views  of  them  with  myself* 


&2 


If  you  can  make  it  convenient,  I  wish,  in  some  of  your  itine* 
rations,  you  would  visit  those  people.  The  chief  conversation 
I  had  with  them,  was  with  'Squire  Hoyl,  who  perhaps  lives 
down  the  river  a  few  miles  from  Cosner's  meeting-house.  He 
appears  to  be  a  sensible,  discerning  man  ;  and  to  him  I  refer 
you  for  further  information. 

I  sent  the  people  an  address  of  a  considerable  length,  in 
v/hich  I  appealed  to  them  as  to  the  chief  of  the  facts  stated! 
above,  but  have  not  heard  how  it  has  been  received  by  thcm# 

In  this  I  hope,  my  dear  sir,  you  cannot  think  I  have  g  §  §3 
as  I  am  conscious  that  what  I  have  in  view  is  the  real  5  |  * 
nor  have  I  any  objections  if  it  were  necessary  to  fi^Z 
them,  as  it  only  contains  a  summary  of  what  I 

It  is  doubtful  with  me,  whether  I  will  ever  see  these  good 
people  ag^in.  My  prayers  and  best  wishes  are  towards  them, 
as  a  constituent  part  of  the  church  of  our  common  Lord. 

The  rest  of  the  letter  is  of  himself,  and  not  relevant  to  this. 

He  concludes — what  shall  I  render  to  the  Lord,  for  all  his 
goodness  and  mercy  manifested  to  me ! 

I  am,  reverend  and  dear  brother,  affectionately  yours, 

JAS.  HALL* 


[copies.] 

This  may  certify,  that  we  were  at  a  catechising  held  by  D. 
Henkel  at  Jacob  Costner's,  in  January,  1818,  a  few  days  before 
the  sacrament ;  when  and  where  the  said  Henkel  advised  or 
exhorted  his  young  people  not  to  intermarry  amon^  the  Bap- 
tists, Methodists,  nor  any  other  profession  ; 

That  "birds  of  a  feather 
*  Ought  to  flock  together 

that  they  well  knew  that  it  often  divided  the  children,  that 
the  half  would  be  as  the  father,  and  the  other  half  as  the 
mother ;  and  they  were  (  )  let  them  marry  together,  and 
all  be  wrong;  and  let  "the  birds  of  a  feather  flock  together," 
as  he  would  be  sorry  tha,t  one  half  of  the  children  should  go 
the  wrong  way,  and  on  closing  said  — — ,  so  might  cows  and 
horses  marry :  and  that  he  dwelled  on  this  subject  for  upwards 
of  an  hour ;  and  told  them  that  there  was  scripture  to  prove, 
that  marrying  in  other  professions  was  forbid — and  quoted, 
where  it  says,  "  Be  ye  equally  yoked." 

fortified  by  us,    Elizaeeth  Friday?    Louisa  Costner^ 
Ma£.  Friday*  Peter  Cqstner? 


) 


0S 

The  said  Peter  Costner  saith  he  told  them  this  was  wovt 
nearly  the  last  of  his  advice  to  them ;  that  he  had  only  this  to 
impress  on  their  minds.  And  in  addition  to  the  above,  the 
above  directed  them  to  be  sure  to  get  ministers  to  marry  them.- 
But  said,  perhaps,  get  behind  the  curtains,  and  break  your  legs* ; 
then  they  would  be  ashamed  to  go  to  a  decent  man  or  a  min- 
ister to  marry  them,  and  would  get  some  Squire  only.  And 
also,  that  he  said,  if  they  would,  after  this  advice,  marry  in 
other  professions,  cows  and  horses  might  do  so  too. 

V'  PETER  COSTNER. 

I  certify  this  to  be  a  true  copy,  by  me. 

ANDREW  HOYL. 


The  following  is  in  Mr.  HoyVs  hand  writing,  although  it  is- 
not  signed. 

Yet  Mr.  Henkel  has  a  certificate  contradicting  the  above  g 
but  there  are  several  more  that  will  certify  in  substance  as 
above,  and  say  he  did  also  treat  on  the  subject  of  getting  bas- 
tards, &c.  And  on  the  close  of  all,  linking  all  together,  and 
closed  as  above. 


I  have  now  drudged  through  the  mire*  am  quite  tired  of  it, 
and  afraid  of  such  a  lasting  impression  as  will  prevent  any 
cordial  union  between  me  and  him,  and  his  honest  readers  and 
him.  Had  he  shown  any  sign  of  humility,  or  only  a  distant 
confession  of  having  acted  improperly,  freely  ought  he  to  be 
forgiven  on  true  amendment,  and  every  thing  might  before 
now  have  been  buried  in  oblivion ;  but  when,  instead  of  con- 
fessing errors,  he  boldly  increaseth  in  malice,  in  telling  stories, 
and  acting  in  M  respects  as  a  reprobate^  surrendering  his  tafc 


en:s  to  satanic  powers,  and  with  them  continues,  with  renbva 
ted  strength,  to  cause  bitterness  to  be  established  in  congre 
nations  of  Christians,  there  is  no  hope  left ! 


ERRATA 

Page  3,  seventh  line  from  below,  read,  "  and  treat  you.3? 
Page  9,  about  the  middle,  rea4k,  "  dupes  and  asses — p.  20,' 
Page  11,  seventh  line,  read,  "  If  you  say  so,  pray  do  it." 
Page  26th,  fifth  line,  read,  "  father  a  Dumkopf" 

do.       22d  line,  read  calumet,  hot  calamut. 
Page  3.1,  twelfth  line  from  below,  read  Felthusen. 
Page  33,  18th  line,  read  intents,  not  entreats* 
Page  40,  5th  line  from  below,  read  sue,  not  see. 
Page  46,  ifear  thfr  offset,  read  detest,  not  detest* 


*  ■  •  , 


/ 


ft 


f 


c 


